Abdullahi Haruna & Ors V. Kogi State House of Assembly & Ors (2004)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report

I.T. MUHAMMAD, J.C.A.

The appellants herein, as plaintiffs at the Kogi State High Court of Justice, holden initially, at Obangede and later at Okene, (the court below), took out a writ of summons. The claims endorsed in both the Writ of Summons and the Plaintiffs’ Joint Statement of Claim are as follows:-

“(a) A declaration that the Plaintiffs are the Beneficial Owners of the respective properties situate in various locations in Lokoja, Kogi State, individually purchased from the 4th Defendant sometime in the Year 2000.

(b) A declaration that the respective Certificates of Occupancy granted and issued by the 3rd Defendant to each of the Plaintiffs covering their respective properties purchased from the 4th Defendant in the 2000 were properly issued, valid and subsisting.

(c) A perpetual injunction restraining the Defendants by themselves, their servants, agents, privies or any person howsoever called acting on their behalf from tampering with, revoking, inquiring into or interfering with the quiet enjoyment by the Plaintiffs of their said respective tittles in their respective properties.

(d) Twenty Million Naira (N20,000,000.00) only being damages for the embarrassment, agony and pain caused the plaintiffs by the unnecessary publication by the 2nd Defendants Committee on Works and Housing on Kogi State Radio and Nigeria Television Authority Lokoja the Committee’s invitation to the Plaintiffs to appear before it on 3rd September, 2003.”

On the 10th day of September 2003, Prince B. S. Ikani, Hon. A-G Kogi State filed a Notice of Conditional Appearance on behalf of the defendants who are now respondents in this appeal. My observation has shown that there was no Statement of Defence filed by any of the defendants. Several interlocutory matters were taken and decided by the court below. Among such matters was a Notice of Preliminary Objection to the competence of the suit before the learned trial judge. The preliminary objection was argued by the respective parties on 19/11/03. Ruling was reserved and indeed delivered on 21/11/2003. The learned trial judge found the suit incompetent. He declined jurisdiction and sustained the preliminary objection of the learned A-G of Kogi State.

The plaintiffs were aggrieved with that decision and appealed to this court on five grounds of appeal as set out in the Notice of Appeal.

I think, for a clearer picture of the whole case, it is pertinent to recast in full the background facts giving rise to this appeal as contained in the printed record of the appeal placed before this court. The plaintiffs averred in their pleadings that they are Nigerians of Kogi State origin and held various political offices in Kogi State between 29th May, 1999 and 28th May, 2003. The 1st defendant is the body responsible for making laws in Kogi State while the 2nd defendant is the head of the 1st defendant. The 3rd defendant is the Governor of Kogi State responsible for the administration of Kogi State while the 4th defendant is the Kogi State Government. The 5th defendant is the Chief Law Officer for Kogi State while the 6th defendant is the Commissioner responsible for land administration and the physical development of Kogi State.

The plaintiffs averred that while in the service of the 4th defendant, they were all allocated official quarters to accommodate them at Prince Abubakar Audu Housing Estate and old GRA in Lokoja. After the inauguration of Civilian Administration on 29th May 1999, the Federal Government of Nigeria requested the Revenue Mobilization Allocation Fiscal Commission to determine the remuneration payable to political and public office holders in Nigeria. Each State of the Federation was represented on the Commission with Dr. Farouk Abdul Azeez representing Kogi State. The report by the Revenue Mobilization Allocation Fiscal Commission on the remuneration package for the Executive, Legislature and Judiciary was submitted to each State of the Federation by their respective representative. Dr. AbdulAzeez submitted Kogi State report to the 3rd respondent. The 4th respondent, after detailed study of the said report decided to adopt same for implementation in Kogi State. A bill to that effect was passed into law by the 1st respondent and assented to by the 3rd respondent in the year 2000. Among the policies for implementation in the report only six principal officers of the State Government were to be provided with official accommodation due to the sensitive nature of their assignments to wit: the Governor, the Deputy Governor, the Speaker of the House of Assembly, Deputy Speaker of the House of Assembly, the Chief Judge of the State and the Grand Kadi. All other Government quarters were to be considered excess and sold, and in the case of sale, the occupants of the houses were to be given an option of refusal. The 4th respondent, in accordance to that policy, offered to sell houses to the appellants at various sums of money either at Prince Abubakar Audu housing Estate or GRA in Lokoja and the appellants averred that they had accepted the offers. The term of the sale was for either outright down payment or for instalmental payment of the purchase price of a period of fifteen years at monthly payments to the 4th respondent until the purchase price was fully liquidated. Appellants averred further that they entered into a sale agreement with the 4th respondent’ in respect of each of the respective houses sold to them. Further terms of the contract of sale were that the appellants were to be issued with certificate of Occupancy upon payment of at least 25% of the purchase price to the 4th respondent. Appellants claimed that all of them paid the 25% deposit after which Rights of Occupancy were issued to them by the 4th respondent in respect of each of their houses.

The appellants averred further that while in the service of the 4th respondent between 1999 and 29th May 2003, they were entitled to certain arrears of salaries, allowances and other fringe benefits which the appellants requested the 4th respondent not to pay them but commute towards payment for their houses. It is the appellants’ averment that in accordance with the monetization policy of Kogi State, the 4th Republic legislative quarters located on Lokoja-Okene Road, were sold to all former members of the 1st respondent at the cost of N2.5m and the money was to be paid within a period of some years.

Sometime on 28th of August, 2003, the appellants received letters from the 1st respondent’s Committee on Works and Housing requesting them to appear before the Committee. On 29th September, 2003, the Chairman of the 1st respondent’s Committee on Works and Housing Chief Rinde Asagu addressed a World Press Conference which was reported in Tribune of Tuesday 2nd September 2003 and concluded the plaintiffs acquired their properties illegally and that they will use every step to recover same. Appellants claimed that all of them had paid more than 55% of the purchase price and had not defaulted in their monthly instalmental payments and that their salaries were being deducted from the date of the initial deposit up to the end of their tenure with the 4th respondent on 29th May, 2003. The 4th respondent through Kogi Investment and Properties Limited maintains a ledger for the purpose of recording appellants’ payments. Further, appellants claimed that they were entitled to leave allowance for a period of 4 years in lieu of going on leave which was commuted to further payment for the houses. Further, they were entitled to severance gratuity at the end of their tenure in office which allowance was also converted as further payment for their respective houses. Appellants averred that the 1st and 2nd respondents had concluded arrangements to recommend the revocation of appellants’ Certificates of occupancy to the 3rd and 6th Respondents and will thereafter urge the 3rd respondent to revoke same in public interest. Hence, appellants made the above claims as aforesaid, against the respondents.

In this court, parties filed and exchanged briefs of argument. In his brief, Mr. Ayodele, learned SAN for the appellants formulated two issues for the determination of this court. These issues are as follows –

“(i) Whether the claim of the Plaintiffs/Appellants as constituted discloses a reasonable cause of action.