Othniel Shekse V Victor Plankshak & Ors (2008)

LAWGLOBAL HUB Lead Judgment Report

O. OGEBE, J.S.C

The appellant sued the respondents at the High Court of Justice Pankshin, Plateau State on behalf of himself and Kerang Community seeking the following reliefs as per paragraph 19 his amended statement of claim:-

“Wherefore,, the plaintiff claim against the defendants jointly and severally

(a) A declaration that the Quarry Site within the Bwansuhum area is in the customary Possession and ownership of the plaintiff;

(b) An order that the 1st – 5th Defendant account for the sum of N22,000.00 received from P.W. (NIG) LTSD.

(c) A perpetual injunction against the Defendants, their servants, agents or privies to restrain them

from further acts of trespass.

(d) N25,000.00 (Twenty-Five thousand Naira) damages.”

Pleadings were exchanged between the parties and the trial court after hearing evidence from both parties and listening to the addressees of their counsel thoroughly evaluated the evidence and dismissed the Appellant’s claim. A grieved by that decision the Appellant appealed to the Court of Appeal, Jos Division. In the lead judgment read by Mukhtar, J.C.A. (as she then was) she thoroughly considered all the issues canvassed before the Court of Appeal and dismissed the appeal.

This is a further appeal to the Supreme Court mainly on issues of facts in which there had been concurrent findings of the two lower courts. The learned counsel for the Appellant in a lengthy brief of eighty pages formulated 6 issues for determination as follows:-

( Issue One):

“Whether the Court of Appeal and the lower court were right in dismissing the appellants claims and reliefs having regard to the provisions of sections 34,35,36 and 37 and the interpretation of exhibit ‘D’ the Plateau State Government (white paper) and gazette of 1981 on “Bwanzuhum area/village where the Quarry Site is Located within” is not in Kerang District of Mangu Local Government Council as per the claim and reliefs of the Appellant before the court (Ground One).

(Issue Two)

Whether or not having regards to the pleadings, the evidence called cum the exhibits tendered the learned justices of the Court of Appeal were right in dismissing the appellant’s declaratory claim that the Quarry site in Bwanzuhum” in not part of Kerang District. (Grounds Two. Five and Nine).