Zacheus Faleye & Ors V. Mr. Rasheed Dada & Ors (2016)

LAWGLOBAL HUB Lead Judgment Report

MARY UKAEGO PETER-ODILI, J.S.C.

The Appellants as Plaintiffs at the Customary Court, Ogun State claimed against the Respondents as Defendants the following:-

(a) Declaration of title to the piece of land situate, lying and being at Igbo Eleidi between Osuke and Ijaba Roads Ota.

(b) An order of Injunction to restrain the Defendants, their servants, agents or privies from entering, alienating or doing anything on the land in dispute, Annual rental value of the land is N100.00 (One Hundred Naira).

The case of the Plaintiffs in the Customary Court was that their family is the owner of the land in dispute and the Defendant were their customary tenants on the land in dispute. The Defendants on their part claimed that the land belonged to their ancestor from time immemorial and denied being customary tenants of the Plaintiffs.

At the end of the proceedings, the Customary Court delivered a majority judgment dismissing the Plaintiffs’ case and the Plaintiffs dissatisfied appealed to the High Court Ogun State which Court in its appellate jurisdiction set aside the judgment of the Customary Court. Dissatisfied, the Respondents appealed to the

Court of Appeal which in turn set aside the decision of the High Court restoring the majority judgment of the trial Customary Court. Aggrieved with the judgment of the Court of Appeal, Coram J.A. Fabiyi, A.A. Augie, G.I. Udom Azogu JJCA, the Plaintiffs/Appellants have approached the Supreme Court by a Notice of Appeal dated 5th October, 2012 on a four ground of appeal but Appellants later abandoned the 4th Ground of Appeal.

FACTS BRIEFLY STATED:

From the oral evidence put across by the Plaintiffs, their family is the owner of the land in dispute though Plaintiffs admitted that the Defendants (now Respondents) farmed therein as customary tenants to Plaintiffs’ family. The Defendants denied the claims of the Plaintiffs, giving evidence to show that they were possession of the land not as customary tenants but as land owners.

As the proceedings ensued at the trial Customary Court, there was a visit to the locus in quo with the parties in attendance pursuant to a request made to the Court by one of the Defendants. In the end, the Ifo/Ota Grade 1 Customary Court gave a majority judgment of 2 to 1 in favour of the Defendants’ family holding that the Plaintiffs did not

prove that the farmland in dispute belonged to their family of Eleidi Atala that rather, the land in dispute belonged to the Ijagba family of which the 1st Defendant is the Head.

On the 25th day of January, 2016 date of hearing, learned counsel for the Appellants, O. O. Ojutalayo Esq, adopted their Brief of Argument filed on 27/8/2014 and deemed filed on 27/8/2014. He raised two issues for determination which are thus:-

(i) Whether the learned Justices of the Court of Appeal were correct in holding that the Appellate High Court Judge, in reviewing and evaluating the findings of fact made by the trial Customary Court, wrongly applied the principles of law as to evaluation of evidence when the said review and evaluation of evidence were based on well established principles regulating the interference of an Appellate Court with findings of fact by a trial Court.(Grounds A and B of the Appeal).

(ii) Whether the learned Justices of the Court of Appeal were correct in failing to consider the Appellants’ response contained in their Brief of Argument to the issues argued by the Respondents in their own Brief before allowing the Respondents’ appeal which failure