MR SAMUEL ONOMO FAKOYA & ANOR V MR. KASIMU SEIDU IJELU

CORAM

PARTIES

1. MR SAMUEL ONOMO FAKOYA

2. CHIEF GANIYU OMOTAYO

APPELLANTS 

MR. KASIMU SEIDU IJELU RESPONDENTS

AREA(S) OF LAW

SUMMARY OF FACTS

The Appellants/Claimants herein for themselves and on behalf of Otugorishen family in Ikorodu by an amended writ of summons and statement of claim sought a declaration that they are entitled to a grant of Certificate of Occupancy under the Land use Act in respect of a disputed land, damages for trespass, perpetual injunction restraining the Defendants from further acts of trespass on the said land and an order of forfeiture of the Defendants customary tenancy in respect of the said land. The Appellants who relied on traditional history contended that the Defendant’s father was a customary tenant in the disputed land and upon his death the children continued to reside on the said land. They consequently broke into the land and commenced building on it.  The Appellants instituted this action when after resolution by the traditional council; the Respondents persisted in seeking to erect structures on the land. The trial court dismissed the Appellants claim on grounds that the evidence proffered by the Appellants was insufficient to establish his claim of customary tenancy. Dissatisfied with the judgment, the Appellants have appealed to this court.

HELD

Appeal dismissed

ISSUES

Whether the Learned trial Judge failed to consider, evaluate, appraise and attach probative value to the credible, uncontradicted  and unchallenged evidence led by the appellants at the trial in this suit in respect of the land is dispute?

RATIONES DECIDENDI

DECLARATION OF TITLE TO LAND – DUTY OF A PLAINTIFF PLEADING TRADITIONAL HISTORY IN A CLAIM FOR DECLARATION OF TITLE TO LAND

“It is settled law that in pleading traditional history in a claim for declaration of titles, the plaintiff is expected to narrate the genealogical tree from the original owner, the ancestor, in generations appurtenant to him, down the line to the plaintiff. That is to say, he must prove who founded the land; in what manner the land was founded and the circumstances leading to it. Then the successive persons to whom the land thereafter devolved through or unbroken chain or in such a way that there is no gap which cannot be explained” PER OSEJI JCA

CUSTOMARY TENANCY – HOW IS CUSTOMARY TENANCY CREATED?

“Mere averment in the pleadings that a party is a customary tenant does not suffice, in addition, there must be cogent and convincing evidence on the circumstances leading to the creation of the customary tenancy and some activities in sustenance thereof including payment of token tributes or other acts of allegiance to the customary overlord. In other words a customary tenancy is not created by mere wishful thinking. It goes with some customary obligations and conditions which if the tenant complies with, he is entitled to enjoy his holding in perpetuity be it a farmland or a building plot”. PER OSEJI JCA

TRADITIONAL HISTORY – DUTY OF A PARTY RELYING ON EVIDENCE OF TRADITIONAL HISTORY

“A party relying on evidence of traditional History must plead his root of title cogently. Not only that, he must also show in his pleadings who those ancestors were and how they came to own and possess the land and eventually pass it to him, otherwise his claim will fail”. PER OSEJI JCA

DECISION OF COURT – WHETHER THE COURT WILL INTERFERE WITH THE DECISION OF A TRIAL COURT EVEN IF THE REASON FOR THE DECISION IS FAULTY

“The Court will not interfere with a decision correctly reached by a trial court even if the reason for the decision is faulty”
“It is the duty of the trial judge to evaluate evidence and make primary findings of fact. This duty, unless it is shown not to have been done according to laid down principles of law, an appellate court cannot interfere with such findings” PER OSEJI JCA

PROOF – EFFECT OF WHERE THERE IS NO EVIDENCE ON ONE SIDE IN A CIVIL CASE

“It is now settled that where there is no evidence to put on one side of the imaginary scale in a civil case, minimum evidence on the other side satisfies the requirement of proof” PER OSEJI JCA

PROOF OF OWNERSHIP TO LAND – WAYS OF PROVING OWNERSHIP TO LAND

“It is long settled in this country that there are five ways of proving or establishing title to or ownership of Land. These are by traditional evidence; Production of Documents of title duly authenticated in the sense that their due execution must be proved; by positive acts of ownership extending over a sufficient length of time; by acts of long possession and enjoyment of the land; by proof of possession of connected or adjacent land in circumstances rendering it probable that the owner of such connected or adjacent land would in addition, be the owner of the land dispute. It is also settled that the establishment of one of the five ways is sufficient proof of ownership”. PER OSEJI JCA

DECLARATION OF TITLE TO LAND – NATURE OF PROOF REQUIRED BY A PLAINTIFF WHO SEEKS A DECLARATION OF TITLE TO LAND

“A plaintiff who seeks declaration of title to land must prove his root of title to land, where his title is traced to a particular person he must further prove how that person got his own title or came to have the title vested in him”. PER OSEJI JCA

CASES CITED

STATUTES REFERRED TO

CLICK HERE TO READ FULL JUDGMENT