PAUL NWADIKE & ORS V CLETUS CLETUS IBEKWE & ORS.

CORAM

AGBAJE,JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT

ESO, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT

KAWU, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT

NNAEMEKA-AGU, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT

OPUTA, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT

PARTIES

PAUL NWADIKEMARTIN ANELESUNDAY ODOEMENAM

APPELLANTS

CLETUS CLETUS IBEKWE & ORS.

RESPONDENTS

AREA(S) OF LAW

DECLARATION OF TITLE TO A PIECE OR PARCEL OF LAND

SUMMARY OF FACTS

The Plaintiffs, for and on behalf of members of the Eluama family sued the defendants in the High Court claiming against them jointly and severally a declaration of title to a piece or parcel of land, damages for trespass and an injunction restricting them their servants and agents from further entering the land in dispute. Pleadings were filed and delivered. The Plaintiffs led evidence in support of their averments in their Statement of Claim. So did the Defendants in respect of their averments in their Statement of Defense. The learned trial Judge granted the plaintiffs the injunction claimed. The Defendants were not satisfied with the judgment and they appealed against it to the Court of Appeal. The Defendants appeal was dismissed. The defendants were not satisfied with the decision of the Court of Appeal and they appealed to the Supreme Court.

HELD

The appeal failed and was dismissed

ISSUES

1. The Court below erred in law by failing to hold that the Plaintiffs claim ought to have been dismissed since the evidence led by Plaintiffs as to boundaries of the land could not be reconciled with the plan filed by the Plaintiffs in the case.

2. The Court below erred in law by failing to hold that the trial Judge erred in law and misdirected himself when he…….. Stated as follows:-………the Amandugba road is the boundary…….. “and “it is the Defendants land of Eluowerre that is surrounded by trenches and not the Plaintiffs land of Ohia Ukwu Eluama” and when the Court below stated as follows:-” There is a road from Amandugba traversing the South West to East-South cast of the land forming its southern boundary and that the misdirections substantially affected the decision in the case.

RATIONES DECIDENDI

WHAT RAISES A QUESTION OF LAW ALONE

“If there was a defense filed in a case and a trial court erroneously treated the case on the footing of absence of defense to the plaintiffs claim, a ground of appeal challenging such an error by the trial court in my view raises a question of law alone, for the ground of appeal is saying that the trial court has failed in its Judicial duty to consider the defense of the Defendant before it.” Per AGBAJE, J.S.C.

A COMPLAINT INVOLVING QUESTIONS OF LAW ALONE

“A complaint in a ground of appeal that a trial court failed to consider the issues raised on the pleadings before it is certainly a complaint involving questions of law alone.” Per AGBAJE, J.S.C.

IN THE ABSENCE OF DEFENSE TO A PLAINTIFFS CASE THE ONLY ALTERNATIVE IS TO GIVE JUDGMENT FOR THAT PLAINTIFF

“A statement of law to the effect that where there is an absence of defense to a plaintiffs case the only alternative is to give judgment for that plaintiff cannot be faulted.” Per AGBAJE, J.S.C.

DUTY OF THE TRIAL COURT ON TRIALS CONDUCTED ON PLEADINGS FILED

“On trials conducted on the basis of pleadings filed, the trial Court has a duty to resolve issues raised and joined on the pleadings.” Per AGBAJE, J.S.C. A COMPLAINT INVOLVING QUESTIONS OF LAW ALONE “A complaint in a ground of appeal that a trial court failed to consider the issues raised on the pleadings before it is certainly a complaint involving questions of law alone.” Per AGBAJE, J.S.C.