Mallam Bala Muazu Mallam Bawa v. Alhaji Suleiman Aliv (2024)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report – COURT OF APPEAL

UGOCHUKWU ANTHONY OGAKWU, JCA (Delivering the leading judgment)

The provenance of this matter is the contest for the possession of and/or recovery of premises situate at Sarkin Zango Murtala, Lawan Musa Ward, Gashua, Yobe State.

The respondent herein purchased the property from the appellants siblings and then issued statutory notices on the appellant who was in possession of the property to deliver up possession to him.

The appellant failed to deliver up possession, consequent upon which the respondent instituted proceedings before the District Court of Yobe State claiming for an order for vacant possession of the premises.

The matter was subjected to a full dressed plenary hearing at the District Court with testimonial and documentary evidence adduced by the parties.

The District court in its judgment held that the respondent herein did not have the locus standi to maintain the action and dismissed the same.

Having so decided on locus standi, the District Court did not go further to evaluate the evidence with a view to ascertaining if on the merits the respondent was entitled to the reliefs sought.

The respondent, being dissatisfied with the decision of the District Court (hereinafter the trial court) appealed against the same to the appellate jurisdiction of the High Court of Yobe State (hereinafter the lower court) in appeal No. YBS/HCA/09CV/2022: Isa Ali v. Malam Bala Muazu Malam Bawa.

In its judgment, the lower court upheld the locus standi of the respondent to maintain the action and after evaluating the evidence adduced at the trial, the lower court set aside the decision of the trial court and entered judgment in favour of the respondent and ordered that the appellant herein vacate the property forthwith.

The tide having so turned, the appellant, being dissatisfied with the decision of the lower court, obtained the leave of the lower court to appeal to this court. He then appealed by notice of appeal filed on 28th November, 2022. The judgment of the lower court which was delivered on 30th September, 2022 is at pages 75 – 86 of the records of appeal while the notice of appeal is at pages 107-111 of the records of appeal.

The records of appeal having been compiled and transmitted, the parties filed and exchanged briefs of argument. The extant briefs on which the appeal was argued are the amended appellants brief filed on 30th January, 2021 and the respondents amended brief filed on 13th February, 2024. Both Briefs were deemed as properly filed on 20th February, 2024. The appellant nominated five issues for determination in the appeal, videlicet:

1. Whether or not having regards to the record of proceeding of the lower court the respondent has locus standi to institute an action against the appellant for a recovery of premises whereas he was neither party to the sales transactions nor was he his tenant. Distilled from ground one of the appellants grounds of appeal.
2. Whether or not the lower court was right when it fail to consider the privity of contract between the appellant and the respondent. Distilled from ground two of the appellants grounds of appeal.
3. Whether or not having regards to the case at hand there is a tenancy agreement between the appellant and the respondent to warrant the respondent issue notice to quit and notice of owners intention to apply and recover possession. Distilled from ground three of the appellants grounds of appeal
4. Whether or not having regards to the testimonies of PW2 and PW3 who sold the property of the appellant and DW2 long ago can validly transfer good title to the respondent by way of sell (sale). Distilled from ground four of the appellants grounds of appeal.
5. Whether or not failure of the lower court to evaluate the testimonies of the witnesses as contained in the record of proceeding has occasion(ed) miscarriage of justice to the appellant. Distilled from grounds five and six of the appellant grounds of appeal.

For the respondent, two issues sufficed for the determination of the appeal. The said issues are:

Issue one:

Whether the court below rightly evaluated the evidenced proffered by the parties at the trial court or not.