Ashiru Adegoroye & Ors V. Attorney-general of Osun State & Ors (2016)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report

MOHAMMED AMBI-USI DANJUMA, J.C.A. 

The appellants herein were by motion on notice dated the 18th day of March, 2008 and filed on 20th day of March, 2008 granted leave on the 27th day of October, 2008 for :-
1. Extension of time within which to apply for leave to appeal
2. Leave to appeal and
3. Extension of time within which to file notice of appeal and grounds of appeal against the judgment of the High Court of Osun State, Iwo Judicial Division delivered on the 30th of November, 2005.

Upon the filing of the notice and grounds of appeal, the parties filed and exchanged the necessary processes after the due transmission and service of the record of appeal.

The appellants brief of argument came in pursuant to leave granted on 8-4-2009 on motion of 24th of January, 2009 which was filed on 26-1-2009. Brief of the said appellants dated 24-1-2009 and filed 26-1-2009 was deemed filed on 8-4-2009.

The 1st and 2nd respondents were granted leave on 19-1-2016 and the 5th and 6th respondents on 14 – 4 -2016 to file their briefs. All filed their briefs of argument out of time by leave of Court

1

granted as indicated.

Appellants were also granted leave on 14 – 4 -2016 vide their motion filed 16-2-2016 to file the appellants’ reply brief out of time. At the hearing, the 5th and 6th respondents by their learned counsel on the 14 – 4 -2016 moved a motion for the amendment of their 5th and 6th respondents’ brief of argument; and the application was granted and the brief deemed filed on the said 14 – 4 – 2016 accordingly. lt was initially filed on 18 – 2 – 2013.

The relevant processes for the determination of this appeal are the followings:
1. The appellants’ brief of argument filed 26-1-2009 but deemed filed on 8 -4- 2009.
2. The 1st and 2nd respondents brief of argument filed on 27 -2 -2014 but deemed filed on 19 – 1 – 2016 and incorporating a notice of preliminary objection which had been filed on 27-2-2014.

The 5th and 6th respondents brief of argument incorporating arguments on preliminary objection had also been distinctly filed and separately on 23-1-2013. The appellants had also filed an appellants reply brief of argument.
FACTS OF THE CASE AT THE TRIAL COURT
1.1. The plaintiffs by

2

a writ of summons dated and filed on the 28th day of January, 2003 commenced an action in suit No. HIW/4/2003 over a chieftaincy dispute relating to the vacant stool of Oluwo-Oke of Iwo Oke which said stool became vacant after the demise of Oba Busari Salawu Majoyeogbe in the year 2001.
1.2. The plaintiffs filed their statement of claim on the 5th day of February, 2003 and this was amended and filed on 12th November, 2003. By the amended statement of claim, the plaintiffs claimed against the defendants as follows:
(a) Declaration that in accordance with lwo Oke Customary Law, there are 2 Ruling Houses of the Oluwo – Oke Chieftaincy title, namely Ojo Adegbenle and Akadiri Ruling Houses of lwo – Oke in Ola Oluwa Local Government Area of Osun State and each of these Ruling Houses produce the Oluwo Oke of lwo – Oke in rotation.
(b) Declaration that in accordance with the said Iwo-Oke Chieftaincy Law, it is the turn of Ojo Adegbenle Ruling Houses (the plaintiffs Ruling Houses) to provide candidate to fill the present vacancy in the stool.
(c) Declaration that the 3rd plaintiff, having been nominated by the plaintiffs Ruling

3

House, is rightful person entitled to be appointed and installed to fill the present vacancy in the stool according to the customary law.
(d) Declaration that under the said customary law of Iwo-Oke, Lawani Adeoye Family of Iwo-Oke (5th and 6th defendants family) is not a Ruling house of the Oluwo-Oke Chieftaincy, hence it is not entitled to provide candidate to fill the vacant stool of Oluwo-Oke.
(e) Declaration that the 4th defendant as he prescribed authority for the Oluwo – Oke chieftaincy lacks the power to appoint or approve the appointment or selection of candidate to fill the vacant stool of the Ruling Houses except Ojo Adegbenle Ruling Houses under the customary law of lwo – Oke.
(f) Injunction restraining the 1st and 2nd defendants, their servants or agents from recommending to or directing the 3rd and 4th defendants to appoint and/or install the 6th defendant or any person from Lawani Adeoye family of lwo – Oke to fill vacant stool.
(g) Injunction restraining the 4th defendant, his servant or agent from appointing or approving the appointment or selection of the 6th defendant or any person from Lawani Adeoye Family of Iwo-Oke to

4