Brossette Manufacturing Nig. Ltd V. M/s Ola Ilemobola Limited & Ors (2007)

LAWGLOBAL HUB Lead Judgment Report

I. KATSINA-ALU, J.S.C

This is an appeal against the decision of the Court of Appeal, Kaduna Division delivered on 14 December, 1999 which allowed the appeal of the plaintiff.

The 1st respondent M/S Ola Ilemobola Co. Ltd. as plaintiff in the trial High Court claimed against the defendants as per paragraph 42 of her amended statement of claim. The said paragraph 42 reads as follows:-

“42. WHEREOF the plaintiff prays this Honourable Court for the following orders:-

(a) That the purported order of revocation of the plaintiff’s right of occupancy dated the 12th day of June, 1986 does not apply to the plaintiff’s right of occupancy with certificate of occupancy No. NC3640 dated the 21st day of September, 1977.

(b)That the purported order of revocation of the plaintiff’s right of occupancy dated the 12th of June, 1986 is null and void and of no effect whatsoever since same took retrospective effect.

(c)That the revocation order is defective in law since same is not in compliance with the provisions of the Land Use Act of 1978.

(d) A declaration that the plaintiff is still the rightful holder of the right of occupancy over the said piece of land known as No. 4 Maichibi Close and covered by a certificate of occupancy No. 3640 and dated the 21st day of September, 1977.

(e)The plaintiff also claim against the defendants jointly and/or severally as follows:-

(i) The sum of N50, 000.000 (Fifty thousand Naira) only being expenses incurred in clearing and fencing the said plot of land known as No.4 Maichibi Close, Kaduna South as special damages.

(ii)The plaintiff further claim the sum of N1.5 million (One million and five hundred thousand naira) only as general damages and loss of use of the said piece or parcel of land.”The plaintiff essentially brought this action challenging the revocation of the statutory right of occupancy over a plot of land known as Plot, No.4, Kaduna South, Maichibi Close. Industrial Estate Kaduna. At the close of pleadings, parties called evidence and addressed the trial court. In the course of his address, learned counsel for plaintiff abandoned the prayer for damages.

In his judgment delivered on 3 November, 1993, the learned trial Judge held that the revocation order was valid and consequently dismissed the plaintiff’s action.

The plaintiff appealed against the dismissal of his claim to the Court of Appeal. The plaintiff’s appeal was allowed.

Being dissatisfied with the judgment of the Court of Appeal, the 4th defendant Brossette Manufacturing Nigeria Ltd. has appealed to this court.