Boye Industries Limited & Anor. V. Adisa Sowemimo (2009)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report

ISA AYO SALAMI, J.C.A. (OFR)

The Plaintiffs now respondents instituted an action against the defendants, appellants herein, claiming as per their amended writ of summons and amended statement of claim as follows:-

“A declaration that the purported sale of the land in dispute to the Defendants and the subsequent purported certificate of occupancy issued to the 1st Defendant purportedly covering the land in dispute is null and void and of no effect for lack of title on the part of the 1st Defendant’s vendors.

ii. A declaration that the 1st Plaintiff is entitled to the statutory right of occupancy over the land in dispute covering 1.452 hectres shown on survey plan No Kesh/L/775 A dated 7th January, 1980 opposite the International Trade Fair Complex along Badagry Express Road, Onireke, Lagos.

iii. A perpetual injunction restraining the Defendants by themselves, their agents, servants, privies and assigns from further trespassing on the land in dispute as shown on survey plan No Kesh/L/775A dated 7th January 1980 opposite the International Trade Fair Complex, Badagry Express Road, Onireke, Lagos and/or from molesting, harassing, embarrassing, disturbing and/or in any way preventing the plaintiffs, their servants, agents privies and assigns from the plaintiffs’ peaceable occupation and possession of the land in dispute or in any wise tampering with same.”

The defendants, the appellants herein counter – claimed against the first plaintiff, first respondents herein after as follows –

“(i) The sum of N2 million being damages for trespass committed by the 1st plaintiff on the Defendants’ parcel of land lying, being and situate at Opposite International Trade Fair Complex, Badagry Express Road, Onireke Village, Lagos as shown on certificate of occupancy registered as No 87 page 87 volume 1983 p at the Lands Registry Lagos.

Pleadings were filed, exchanged and settled at the amended statement of claim as well as amended statement of defence and counter-claim. The matter went for trial. On the issues joined, the respondent called two witnesses including the first plaintiff himself. The defence called three witnesses including second defendant. At the end of adducing evidence, learned counsel for both parties addressed the court. Learned trial judge in a reserved and considered judgment accepted the respondents’ case and dismissed that of the appellants.

The appellants not being happy and dissatisfied with the judgment appealed to this court on three grounds of appeal.

In accordance with the court’s practice and procedure briefs of argument were filed and exchanged. The appellants’ brief contained the following issues for determinations.

“(a) whether the learned trial judge was right in treating the grant of the land in dispute by the Lagos State Government to the Defendants as an invalid grant.

(b) whether there was justification for the learned trial judge’s peremptory rejection of the uncontroversted evidence of the hand writing expert (DW2).

(c) whether the learned trial judge’s conclusion that the plaintiffs had proved their claim and the Defendants had failed to prove their counter – claim is supported by the preponderance of evidence.”

The respondents failed to formulate separate issues for determination in this appeal. They merely adopted and relied on the appellants’ formulations.