Mr Adelani Adewoyin V. The Executive Governor, Osun State & Ors. (2011)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report – COURT OF APPEAL

ADUMEIN, J.C.A. (Delivering the Leading Judgment)

The appellant was the plaintiff while the respondents were the defendants in Suit No. HIK/25/2004 filed in the High Court of Osun State, Ikirun Division. In his amended statement of claim, the appellant, as plaintiff in the lower court, sought the following relief, namely:

“(a) DECLARATION that the Olobaagun of Obaagun Chieftaincy Declaration of 31st day of December, 1986 made by the third Defendant, and approved by the first Defendant, is of no effect, unconstitutional and invalid since it was not made under the relevant law.

(b) DECLARATION that the Chieftaincy Declaration of Olobaagun of Obaagun of 27th day of May, 1957 is the only valid declaration in respect of the Olobaagun of Obaagun Chieftaincy.

(c) PERPETUAL INJUNCTION RESTRAINING the 1st, 2nd and 3rd Defendants, from giving effect or recognizing the Olobaagun Chieftaincy Declaration of 1985.”

The 4th respondent, who was not originally a party to the suit, was joined as the 4th defendant by an order of the court below. By a notice of preliminary objection dated 30th day of June, 2005 but filed on the 10th day of June 2006 the 4th respondent sought for “An ORDER for dismissing this suit in its entirety for lack of jurisdiction”. The grounds upon which the prayer was premised were:

“1. That subject matter of this suit has previously been litigated upon and decided by the Supreme Court between the parties in Suit Nos. S.C. 251/1984 AND S. C. 143/1999.

2. The Plaintiff by operation of the doctrine of estoppel per res judicata is precluded from bringing this action.
3. The action is frivolous, vexatious and abuse of judicial process.
4. This Honourable Court lacks jurisdiction to entertain this matter”.

The 4th respondent’s notice of preliminary objection was supported with an affidavit of 14 paragraphs and, in opposition, the appellant filed a counter affidavit of 10 paragraphs (pages 6 – 11 of the records of appeal). The parties were heard on the preliminary objection and in a reserved ruling delivered on the 20th day of November, 2006 the preliminary objection was upheld and the appellant suit was dismissed with costs. The ruling of the lower court spans pages 20 to 30 of the record of appeal. The appellant was not satisfied with the decision of the lower court and he filed a notice of appeal containing the following grounds:-

GROUNDS OF APPEAL

“(1) The judgment is against the weight of evidence

(2) The learned trial iudge erred in law and thereby came to a wrong decision by failing to properly consider the issues submitted to him for adjudication.

PARTICULARS OF ERROR IN LAW

(I) It is the primary duty of a trial court to dispassionately consider and evaluate submissions made before it in order to reach just conclusion.

(II) The trial court’s failure in the said primary duty and occasioned a miscarriage of justice.