YUSUF MUSA V. IDI SAMORE
March 23, 2025JALINGO MUSA V. SUVA UMARU & ANOR
March 23, 2025Legalpedia Citation: (2009-06) Legalpedia 55599 (SC)
In the Supreme Court of Nigeria
Holden at Abuja
Sun Jun 26, 2022
Suit Number: SC 419/2009
CORAM
N TOBI, JUSTICE SUPREME COURT
D MUSDAPHER, JUSTICE SUPREME COURT
I F OGBUAGU, JUSTICE SUPREME COURT
I T MUHAMMAD, JUSTICE SUPREME COURT
J O OGEBE, JUSTICE SUPREME COURT
PARTIES
1. POPOOLA BAMGBEGBIN
2. LAMIDI DIEKOLA
3. LAPADE ADISA
4. GBADAMOSI ODUOLA (for themselves and on behalf of the Apete family)
5.SAFIU ADAORUBGBO
6. ALFA OBAJI AGBADUN
7. LAYIWOLA ORISALEYE
8.GANIYU SANGOUNDE
9.LIASU TIJANI
10. ALHAJI ELEGBEDE
11. LALEKAN BABAAGBA
12. RAMONI BABAAGUN
13. AYOADE ADELEKE
14. BAMIJI OKE-ESU
15. ADEBISI ALADURA
16. AMINATU ARANSI
17. ADESINA ELEDIE
18. MUKAILA ABA IDI-ORO
19. LAWAL ALABI
20. OLADEJO AKANBI
21. ALHAJI WAHABI SANUSI
22. BAMIDELE GBADAMOSI
23. MURTALAB SUARA
24. TIAMIYU AROLA
25. AMOPE LASISI AKINWALE
APPELLANTS
1. JIMOH ATANDA ORIARE
2. ALHAJI SALAWU ORIALE (for themselves and on behalf of Oriale Family)
3. LAWAL BALOGUN
4. RAIMIIKUPAKUN
5. JAMES OLADIMEJI
RESPONDENTS
AREA(S) OF LAW
Not Available
SUMMARY OF FACTS
The plaintiffs claimed against the defendants a declaration that there were entitled to certificate of statutory rights of occupancy. The trial judge made several orders. The parties were dissatisfied, and both parties appealed and cross appealed. The Court of Appeal partly allowed both the appeal and cross-appeal. The appellants were dissatisfied with the part which dismissed their appeal and have now appealed.
HELD
Appeal dismissed
ISSUES
None.
RATIONES DECIDENDI
MEANING OF ISSUE ESTOPPEL
Issue estoppel is an impediment which bars a person from relitigating an issue which has been isolated and raised in a particular proceeding and has been finally determined in that proceedings. Per MUHAMMAD, JSC
PROOF OF CLAIM
In a civil action where there is an overwhelming evidence in proof of the claim before the trial court, the plaintiff will have discharged the onus of proof placed upon him by law where he puts sufficient evidence in support of his claim. Per MUHAMMAD, JSC
CONCURRENT FINDINGS OF COURT
Where there are concurrent findings of facts, an appeal court is always loathe in interfering with such findings except where perversity in such findings are shown. Per MUHAMMAD, JSC
CASES CITED
1. Ikoku & Ors v. Ekenkwu & Ors (1995) 7 NWLR (Pt.410) 637
2. Ezemba v. Ibeneme (2004) 14 NWLR (Pt.894) 617
3. Durosaro v, Ayorinde (2005) 8 NWLR (Pt.927) 407
4. Nwankwere v. Adewunmi (1967) 4 NWLR 45
5. Gbadamosi v. The Governor of Oyo State & Ors (2006) 13 NWLR (Pt.947) 363
STATUTES REFERRED TO
None.
