Adekomi Akinmade & Ors V. Akibu Aileru & Ors (1996)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report

MURITALA AREMU OKUNOLA, J.C.A. 

This is an appeal against the judgment of P. O. Aderemi J of Oyo State High Court, Ogbomosho, delivered on 28/6/89.

The facts of this case briefly put were as follows:

In the Ogbomosho High Court of Oyo State of Nigeria the Plaintiffs/Appellants claimed against the Defendants/Respondents jointly and severally as follows:

“(a) A declaration that according to customary law, the holder of Baale of Idigba Chieftaincy can be appointed from amongst only the members of Bale Idigba family of Ile Baale, Idigba, Ejigbo Local Government of Oyo State of Nigeria.

(b) A declaration that the 1st Defendant is not a member of the said Baale Idigba family.”

(c) A declaration that the 1st Plaintiff is the only person who was validly nominated to succeed late Chief Bello Adegboye as Baale of Idigba.

(d) A declaration that the nomination, appointment and installation of the 1st Defendant as the new Baale of Idigba is against the customary law, custom and tradition of Idigba and is invalid, null and void.

(e) Injunction restraining the 1st Defendant from parading himself as a member of Baale Idigba family.

(f) Injunction restraining the 1st Defendant from parading himself as the Baale of Idigba.

(g) Injunction restraining the 2nd Defendant from continuing to recognise and deal with the 1st Defendant as the Baale of Idigba.”

Pleadings were filed and exchanged between the parties. The bone of contention between the parties was whether or not the 1st defendant is a member of Alaadorun’s family. The Plaintiffs averred that he is and that he was consequently not entitled to be appointed Baale of Idigba. The Defendants vehemently denied the averments. The defendants pleaded that the 1st defendant belongs to Baale Idigba family and that the 1st defendant is not a member of Alaadorun’s family.

The 2nd Plaintiff as well as both defendants gave evidence. The Plaintiffs called five witnesses while the defendants called four. The 2nd Plaintiff and the 5th P.W. testified that the 1st defendant is a member of Alaadorun’s family. The 1st defendant and the 3rd and 4th defence witnesses also gave evidence that the 1st defendant is a member of Alaadorun’s family. The 2nd Plaintiff gave evidence that no member of Alaadorun’s family was appointed Baale of Idigba previous to the appointment of the 1st Defendant. The 4th D.W. also testified that “No person from Alawo family, Alaadorun’s family or Oniyere’s family has ever become Baale Idigba.” The 2nd defendant, under cross-examination testified that nobody from Alaadorun’s family has been appointed Baale Idigba. Further in his evidence, the 2nd defendant said that the plaintiffs protested against the appointment of the 1st defendant on the ground that the 1st defendant is not a member of Baale Idigba family. It was not in dispute that the 2nd defendant did nothing about the protests even though the 2nd defendant is the prescribed authority in respect of Baale of Idigba chieftaincy. At the hearing, it was also not in dispute that every member of Baale Idigba family is entitled to vie for the stool of Idigba whenever it becomes vacant.

At the end of the trial, the learned trial judge held that no member of Alaadorun’s family could aspire to become Baale of Idigba if Alaadorun’s family is not an off shoot of Baale Idigba chieftaincy family. Consequently, the Court granted leg (a) of the Plaintiffs’ claims and dismissed the remaining legs.