Sunday Ogunsina V Sunmonu Matanmi (2001)

LAWGLOBAL HUB Lead Judgment Report

KALGO, J.S.C.

In the Ogun State High Court holden at Abeokuta in the Abeokuta Judicial Division,the appellants as plaintiffs sued the respondents for:

(1) Declaration that the plaintiffs are entitled to customary and statutory rights of occupancy on a piece or parcel of land situate. Lying and being at Ijoko Otta via Abeokuta, Ogun State.

(2) Forfeiture of whatever interest the defendants may have on the land for misconduct.

(3) Injunction to restrain the defendants, privies and agents from alienating, leasing or doing anything on the land without the consent or approval of the plaintiffs.

The appellant filed a 38-paragraph amended statement of claim and the respondents filed a 58-paragraph amended statement of defence denying the appellants’ claims and setting up a counter-claim in paragraph 59 which reads:

(1) That the Matanmi family is entitled to the statutory/customary right of occupancy in respect of the piece or parcel of land situate lying and being at Ijoko Otta. Ogun State as shown in plan No. ESEW/W/2523/15 drawn by M. A. Sewaje a Licensed Surveyor.

(2) Forfeiture of whatever interest the 1st plaintiff/appellant (Iyabo Albert) may have on the said land.

(3) Injunction to restrain plaintiff/appellant by counter-claim from alienating, leasing or doing anything on the land without the consent of the defendants/counter-claimants.

Parties called witnesses in support of their respective pleadings at the end of which their Counsel addressed the court. The learned trial Judge, Sogbetun. J. delivered a considered judgment on the 20th of January, 1987. in which he upheld the counter-claim of the respondents and dismissed the appellants’ claims.

He stated on p. 298 of the record:-

“It is hereby declared that the Matanmi family is entitled to the statutory/customary right of occupancy in respect of the vast area of land situate. lying and being at Ijoko, Otta, Ogun State and as shown in Exhibit “14” plan No. ESEW/W/2523/15 subject to specific grants existing on the land.

Injunction is also hereby granted against the plaintiffs restraining them from alienating, leasing or doing anything further on the land above mentioned and described without the consent of the defendants/counter-claimants.”

Dissatisfied with this decision, the appellants appealed to the Court of Appeal Ibadan which heard the appeal, dismissed it and affirmed the decision of the trial court. The appellants appealed to this court on seven grounds of appeal. In this court, both parties tiled and exchanged their briefs of argument as required by the rules of court. The appellants in their brief raised 4 issues for the determination of this court to wit: