CORAM
PARTIES
WA’AJIM BAYO
ZAKARIAH TSOKWA
AREA(S) OF LAW
Not Available
SUMMARY OF FACTS
The Respondent amongst other reliefs sought at the High Court of Taraba State, claimed for declaration of title to land, an injunction as well as damages against the Appellant. It was alleged that the Respondent’s witnesses gave a different traditional history as to who founded the land, how it was founded and particulars of the intervening owners through whom the Respondent claimed title. At the trial, the court entered judgment in favour of the Respondent in terms of the reliefs sought. Dissatisfied with the decision, the Appellant has appealed to this court.
HELD
Appeal Dismissed
ISSUES
Did the Respondent prove his case before the trial court to have been entitled to a declaration of title to the land in dispute?
RATIONES DECIDENDI
DECLARATION OF TITLE TO LAND – ON WHOM LIES THE BURDEN TO PROOF AN ENTITLEMENT TO A DECLARATION OF TITLE TO LAND
As rightly submitted by the learned counsel to the Appellant, in an action for declaration of title, the burden is on the claimant to prove his entitlement to the declaration. He succeeds on the strength of his case and not on the weakness of the defence, whose only duty is to defend. See, Mogaji Vs. Cadbury Nig. Ltd. (1985) 2 NWLR, 393 at 429, D – E; Kodilinye Vs. Odu (1936) 2 WACA 336 at 337; Onwugbufor Vs. Okoye (1996) 1 NWLR (424) 252 and Shittu Vs. Fashawe (2005) 14 NWLR (946) 671. The exception is where the defendant’s case supports the claimant’s case and contains evidence upon which the claimant is entitled to rely on. See, Mogaji Vs. Cadbury (supra) at 429 – 430, H – A.
PROOF OF TITLE TO LAND – WAYS OF PROVING TITLE TO LAND
“It is settled law that there are five ways by which a claimant may prove title to land. The Supreme Court in the case of Idudun Vs. Okumagba (1976) 9 – 10 SC 227 listed these as follows:
(a)By traditional evidence.
(b)By production of documents of title duly authenticated and executed.
(c)By acts of ownership extending over a sufficient length of time numerous and positive enough as to warrant the inference of true ownership.
(d)By acts of long possession and enjoyment.
(e)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 in dispute.
The claimant is not required to prove all the five ways, if he establishes any one of them, he would be entitled to the declaration sought.”
PROOF OF TITLE TO LAND – INGREDIENTS THAT MUST BE ESTABLISHED WHERE A PLAINTIFF RELIES ON FIRST SETTLEMENT IN PROVING TITLE TO LAND
“Where a plaintiff relies on first settlement, the following must be proved by the pleadings and evidence of the plaintiff:
1.Who founded the land in dispute?
2.How was the land founded?
3.What are the particulars of the intervening owners through whom the plaintiff claims?
See, Alli Vs. Aleshinloye (2000) 4 SCNJ 264 at 284 – 285; Mogaji Vs. Cadbury Nig. Ltd. (1985) 2 NWLR 393 at 429, D – E, Ohiaeri Vs. Akabueze (1992) 2 NWLR (221) 1 and Alikor Vs. Ogwo (2010) 5 NWLR (1187) 281 at 309, D – F.”
DECISION OF COURT – WHETHER AN APPELLATE COURT CAN INTERFERE WITH THE DECISION OF A TRIAL COURT
“Where the trial court has properly evaluated the evidence before it and arrived at a decision that is not perverse, an appellate court would be reluctant to interfere with the decision. See, Burge Vs. Gov. Rivers State (2006) 12 NWLR (1995) 573 at 629, E – H and Saleh Vs. B.O.N. Ltd (2006) 6 NWLR (976) 316 at 329 – 330, H – C.”
CASES CITED
Not Available
STATUTES REFERRED TO
Not Available|