Ogadinma Ikechukwu Iwuala V. Raphael Chima (2016) LLJR-CA

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report

IGNATIUS IGWE AGUBE, J.C.A. 

This Appeal is sequel to the Judgment of the Customary Court of APPEAL of Imo State Holden at Owerri which Judgment was delivered on the 5th day of July, 2013 allowing the Defendant (now Respondent?s) Appeal against the Judgment of the Ohaji District of the Imo State Customary Court Holden at UMUAPU. The Appeal is anchored on 8 (Eight) Grounds as contained in the Notice of Appeal dated 22nd day of October, 2013 and filed same date. Below as reproduced are the Grounds of Appeal albeit without their particulars:
?GROUND (1). ERROR-IN-LAW
The learned Judges of the Customary Court of Appeal, Imo State erred in law when they held at page 7 of the Judgment that:
?The Plaintiff did not prove his title to the Claim?.
?(2). ERROR-IN-LAW
The Learned Judges of the Customary Court of Appeal, Imo State erred in law by assuming the position of the trial Court in re-evaluating evidence in the case which the trial Court had dutifully evaluated and made findings thereon without any justifiable reasons to do so in law.
?(3). ERRORS

1

-IN-LAW
The Learned Judges of the Customary Court of Appeal erred in Law when they held that:
?The fact that the Respondent resiled from the Oath taking is a question of customary Law. Its implication is that the issue in controversy does not belong to him?
?(4). ERROR-IN-LAW
The learned Judges of the Customary Court of Appeal, Imo State erred in Law by ascribing probative value to the Arbitration by OHA-URATTA TRADITIONAL SUPREME COUNCIL when the Court found that the Appellant resiled from the Arbitration.
?(5). MISDIRECTION OF LAW AND FACT
The learned Judges of the Customary Court of Appeal misdirected themselves both in law and fact when in allowing the Appeal they held that the respondent herein is not to be disturbed with his lawful possession of the land in dispute.
?(6). ERROR OF FACT
The learned Judges of the Customary Court of Appeal erred in fact when they held that:
?The issue of pledge was settled by the Oath-taking as directed by the Uratta Traditional Supreme Council which was aborted by the Respondents?.
?(7). ERROR OF LAW AND FACT
The

2

learned Judges erred in law when they held that the Appellants evidence did not disclose that it was a member of his family that was murdered.
?(8). ERROR OF LAW AND FACT
The learned Judges of the Customary Court of Appeal erred both in law and fact when they held that the pledge raised by the Respondent defeated the acts of long possession of the land in dispute by the Appellant when the pledge was not proved.”

Upon the transmission of the Record of Appeal to this Honourable Court, Briefs of Argument were filed and exchanged by the respective learned Counsel for the Appellant and Respondent. For the Appellant, L. A. Oti ? Onyema (Mrs.) of Chief C. C. Onyeagbako & Co. (Ehirim Chambers) who settled his Brief dated the 17th day of March, 2014, filed on the 20th of March, 2014 but deemed properly filed and served with the leave of this Court granted the Appellant on the 25th day of May, 2015; Four (4) ISSUES were nominated for determination couched and reproduced hereunder as follows:
?1. Whether the Customary Arbitration of Oha Uratta Traditional Supreme Council was conclusive, valid and binding on the

3

parties where the Oath-taking recommended by the Panel was not conducted? (Grounds 3 and 4).
?2. Whether the Issue of Pledge which was not effectively proved by the Defendants can defeat long possession of the land by the Plaintiff/Appellant? (Grounds 2, 5, 6 and 8).
?3. Whether the Court below was right in holding that the Plaintiff/Appellant did not prove entitlement to his Claim? (Grounds 1, 5 and 7).
?4. Whether the Court below can interfere with the findings of facts by the trial Court in the absence of exceptional circumstances? (Grounds 2, 5, and 7)?.

On behalf of the Respondent, E. C. Mere Esq, who settled his Brief of Argument dated 4th June, 2015 but filed on the 5th day of June, 2015 distilled 5 (FIVE) Issues which are also hereunder reproduced as follows:
?1. Whether the Justices of the Customary Court of Appeal of Imo State had the right to re-evaluate the evidence and whether they properly evaluated evidence? (Grounds 2 and 7).
?2. Whether Appellant proved title? (GROUND 1).
?3. Whether the holding of the Justices of the Customary Court of Appeal was proper on possession?

4

(Ground 5).
4. Whether the holding of the Justices of Customary Court of Appeal on the arbitration are proper? (Grounds 3 and 4).
?5. Whether there was need for Respondent to prove pledge? (Grounds 6 and 8).

Upon being served with the Respondent?s Brief of Argument, the learned Counsel for the Appellant on the 12th day of June, 2015 filed the Appellant?s Reply Brief dated the 10th day of June, 2015. On the 16th day of February, 2016, the learned Counsel for each of the parties adopted their respective Briefs of Argument to either urge the Court to allow the Appeal or dismiss same.
?
Before delving into the Arguments of Counsel on the Issues formulated for determination, it is only necessary to have a resume of the facts of the case as can be gathered from the Records. It would be recalled that this case started at the Customary Court of Imo State of Nigeria, in the Owerri North Judicial District Holden at UMUOBA between Robinson Iwuala and Harrison Iwuala as plaintiffs against Raphael Chima as Defendant. By the Writ of Summons dated and filed on the 8th day of February, 2002 and the accompanying Claim and Particulars

5