Just Decided Cases

SUNMONU OLOHUNDE V PROFESSOR S.K. ADEYOJU

Legalpedia Citation: (2000) Legalpedia (SC) 83364

In the Supreme Court of Nigeria

Fri Jun 30, 2000

Suit Number: SC. 15/1995

CORAM


M.E. OGUNDARE JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT

Amina Adamu Augie

S.O. UWAIFO JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT


PARTIES


SUNMONU OLOHUNDEALIMI ODUOLA APPELLANTS


RESPONDENTS


AREA(S) OF LAW



SUMMARY OF FACTS

The plaintiff sued the defendants for ownership over a parcel of land. He traced the origin of his title to one Efun and failed to prove how the said Efun came to acquire the ownership of the said land.


HELD


The court held that his claims ought to have been dismissed by the lower courts as he has failed to establish how his predecessor in title acquired the land


ISSUES


1. Has the court below not misinterpreted and misapplied the provisions of Section 34 of the Land Use Act 1978 when it relied on mere possession without title to hold that the Respondent was entitled to a Certificate of Statutory Right of Occupancy.

2. Whether, with pleading and evidence at variance, the Respondent had established his case and whether the Court below was right in law to have held that the Respondent who pleaded the original settlement of EFUN as his root of title needed not to have proved the same.


RATIONES DECIDENDI


ONUS ON PLAINTIFF TO PROVE THE VALIDITY OF HIS TITLE


“It is well settled that once a party pleads and traces his root title in an action involving title to land to a particular person or source, and this averment, as in the present case, is disputed or challenged, that party, to succeed, as a plaintiff in the suit must not only establish his own title to such land, he must also satisfy the court on the validity of the title of the particular person or source from whom he claims to have derived his title….”…IGUH JSC


CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY IS NOT A CONCLUSIVE PROOF OF TITLE


“a certificate of statutory or customary right of occupancy issued under the Land Use Act, 1978 cannot be said to be conclusive evidence of any right, interest or valid title to land in favour of the grantee. It is, at best, only a prima facie evidence of such right, interest or title without more and may in appropriate cases be effectively challenged and rendered invalid and null and void.”…IGUH JSC


CASES CITED


1. Mogaji v. Cadbury Nigeria Ltd. (1985) 7 SC 59, (1985) 2 NWLR (Part 7) 393 at 431,
2. Elias v. Omo Bare (1982) 5 SC 25 at 37-58,
3. Akintola v. Lasupo (1991) 3 NWLR (Part 180) 508 at 515,


STATUTES REFERRED TO


Land Use Act, 1978


CLICK HERE TO READ FULL JUDGMENT

Esther ORIAH

Recent Posts

RENCO NIGERIA LIMITED V Q OIL & GAS SERVICES LIMITED & ANOR

Legalpedia Citation: (2025-08) Legalpedia 42685 (CA) In the Court of Appeal PORT HARCORT Mon Aug…

1 week ago

ENGINEERING ENTERPRISE OF NIGER CONTRACTOR CO. OF NIGERIA VS THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL OF KADUNA STATE

Legalpedia Citation: Legalpedia SC KIZW In the Supreme Court of Nigeria Thu Sep 11, 2025…

1 week ago

COMMISSONER OF POLICE, WESTERN REGION VS ALOYSIUS IGWE & 2 ORS

Legalpedia Citation: (1960-01) Legalpedia 19912 (SC) In the Supreme Court of Nigeria Holden at Lagos…

1 week ago

CLEMENT AKRAN VS INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE

Legalpedia Citation: (1960-02) Legalpedia 45350 (SC) In the Supreme Court of Nigeria HOLDEN AT LAGOS…

1 week ago

J. A. IREM VS OBUBRA DISTRICT COUNCIL AND OTHERS

Legalpedia Citation: (1960-03) Legalpedia 03348 (SC) In the Supreme Court of Nigeria HOLDEN AT LAGOS…

1 week ago

JOHN KHALIL KHAWAM AND CO VS K CHELLARAM AND SONS (NIGERIA)

Legalpedia Citation: (1960-03) Legalpedia 49115 (SC) In the Supreme Court of Nigeria HOLDEN AT LAGOS…

1 week ago