Samuel Odeniji & Anor V. Salawu Akinpelu & Ors (1998)

LAWGLOBAL HUB Lead Judgment Report

ONU, J.S.C.

In the High Court of Oyo State holden in Ibadan the plaintiffs (appellants herein) sued the defendants (respondents herein) claiming in paragraph 27 of their amended statement of claim as follows:

(1) A declaration that the 1st and 2nd defendants, their agents and others claiming through them are not descendants of Abolowojaiye family through their paternal side and therefore cannot aspire to take any rights, benefits of the purported installation of the 1st defendant as Baale Abolowojaiye Village in Lagelu Local Government Area on 27th April. 1987 by the 3rd defendant is null and void.

(2) A perpetual injunction against the 1st defendant from parading himself as the Baale of Abolowojaiye village in Lagelu Local Government of Ibadan.

Pleadings were ordered, filed, subsequently amended and exchanged by the parties excluding the 3rd respondent who filed none and did not participate in the trial.

The case went to trial and in a well considered judgment the learned trial Judge, Abiodun Alao, J. dismissed the appellants’ claims in their entirety on 4th November. 1988.

Being dissatisfied with the trial court’s decision, the appellants appealed to the Court of Appeal sitting in Ibadan (Coram: Akanbi and Ogwuegbu. J.J.C.A. as they were then and Salami. J.C.A.) which also dismissed their appeal on 23rd January, 1992.

Further aggrieved by that decision of the Court of Appeal (which I shall hereinafter refer to simply as the court below in the rest of this judgment), appellants filed a notice of appeal containing seven grounds attacking the decision.

For a better appreciation of the facts giving rise to the case. I think it is pertinent to set them out as follows:

One Labulo Abolowojaiye, a great Ibadan warrior was the reputed founder of Abolowojaiye Village where he was the first Baale. During one of the various wars fought by Labulo, he was said to have captured a woman called Akode who was nursing a male child (Akinpelu) at the time of her capture. Labulo later married Akode who had issues for him and who in that regard were half brothers and sisters of Akinpelu. It was appellants’ case that Labulo adopted Akinpelu as his child but in order to differentiate Akinpelu from the direct issues he begat from Akode, Labulo incised “Gombo” marks on Akinpelu’s cheeks which were similar to those Akode had. These were marks distinguishable with the ‘”mefa -mefa” marks on Labulo and his natural children. As a matter of fact, the Ist appellant (Samuel Odiniji) while testifying as P.W.1 as the oldest living member of Labulo family, stated that no member of his (Labulo) family had ever had Gombo marks on his or her face.

He went further to show how the Akinpelu family is not in any way related to Labulo family in that while Labulo family worship the gods of Sanponna and Ogun, the Akinpelu family worship Osun. It was further the case of the appellants that Labulo family is in no way related to Akinpelu family more especially that the two families intermarried each other, whereas in Yoruba custom, people who are related do not intermarry.

Albeit, the rivalry between Labulo and Akinpelu families over succession to the Baaleship of Abolowojaiye was brought to a head when, to stem the wrangles, the 1st respondent was unanimously nominated to fill the vacancy – an act the 3rd defendant endorsed. The appellants’ dissatisfaction with that arrangement is what has led to the case herein on appeal.

The parties exchanged briefs in accordance with the rules of this court. While the appellants submitted five issues as arising for determination, the respondents formulated a single issue for the resolution of the appeal. I prefer the lone and dominant question proffered by the respondents which asks:

Whether the Akinpelu family is related to the Labulo Abolowojaiye family on the father side or not.