Adelani Adewuyi & Ors V. Chief (Mrs.) Olagbenke Ipaye (2014)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report – COURT OF APPEAL

MOJEED ADEKUNLE OWOADE, J.C.A. (Delivering the leading Judgment)

This is an appeal against the judgment of the High Court of Justice Osun State delivered by the Hon. Justice A.A.G. Onibokun at the Ile-Ife High Court on 9th day of November 2006.

By paragraph 18 of their statement of claim, the Respondent as plaintiff in the Court below claimed as follows:

“1. Declaration that the farmland situate, lying and being at Agbonkuta village, via Ile-Ife is the joint property of both the plaintiff and the Defendants as offspring of Late Akintilo.

2. Partition of the said farmland in four section (SIC) of the family as opposed to the claim of the Defendants to exclusive ownership.
3. Injunction restraining the Defendants and or their privies or agents from further receipt of tribute and or Isakole from the tenants on the said farmland”.

Pleadings were filed and exchanged by an amended statement of Defence filed on the 7th day of July, 2006 the Defendants/Appellants denied the statement of claim in material terms and issues were thus joined.

It is the contention of the Plaintiff/Respondent that the farmland in dispute at Agbonkuta village via Ile-Ife belonged to Akintilo, the ancestor of the contending parties. That upon Akintilo’s demise, the Agbonkuta farmland devolved on all the parties including the Defendants.

That Jacob Obisanya, father of 2nd to 4th Defendants, succeeded Akintilo. That Emmanuel Adewuyi, father of the 1st Defendant, succeeded Jacob Obisanya. That Emmanuel Adewuyi was succeeded by Madam Abigael Odunewu Esukemi. Madam Abigael Esukemi was succeeded by Chief Badiru Adegbaju now suing for Omilabu Odunewu sections of Akintilo family. And upon above, the Respondent as Plaintiff wants a declaration that the farmland at Agbonkuta is the joint property of all the plaintiff family including the Defendants Appellants.

The Appellants, on the other hand contend that the farmland at Agbonkuta personally jointly belong to Jacob Obisanya and Emmanuel Adewuyi and not to Akintilo, who had his own farm in Agboje, far away from Agbonkuta.

Jacob Obisanya was a hunter at the Agbonkuta farm where he settled down and planted economic crops and later took in Isakole paying tenants. That his junior brother Emmanuel Adewuyi was at Osi Village. And, he would sometimes come to his brother at Agbonkuta staying two-three days.

Upon the demise of his brother Jacob Obisanya, Adewuyi took over the farmland, planted more economic crops and took in more fee paying tenants. That, by the time Jacob Obisanya died, the tenants crops had not started yielding; so no tribute or Isakole was paid until Emmanuel Adewuyi came on board. When Emmanuel Adewuyi died, the children of Jacob Obisanya and those of Emmanuel Adewuyi were too young to manage the farm; hence, the emergence of Madam Abigael Odunewu Esukemi who took over in TRUST for the children of Obisanya and Adewuyi, that is, the Appellants and other direct children.

Upon maturity, the children of Obisanya and Adewuyi demanded from Madam Esukemi the return to them of the Tenancy Agreements in her possession concerning the Agbonkuta farm. She refused to give them and in fact, she attempted to change the name of Jacob Obisanya to read Akintilo, which the Defendants Appellants resisted.

Meanwhile, Esukemi, up till her death, did not release the Tenancy Agreements. The Appellants maintained that even though Jacob Obisanya and Emmanuel Adewuyi were also the children of Akintilo, the Agbonkuta farm belong personally to Jacob Obisanya and Emanuel Adewuyi and the farm is distinct from the Akintilo family property, one of which is at Apoje farm.

They contend that Madam Esukemi and Badiru Adegbaju (Plaintiff) are mere siblings or relations holding the Agbonkuta farm in TRUST for the children of Obisanya and Adewuyi, Defendants Appellants.

At the hearing, the Respondent as Plaintiff gave evidence as PW1 and called two other witnesses. Six (6) witnesses testified for the Defendants Appellants. After the filing and adoption of written Addresses, the learned trial Judge delivered the court’s judgment and found in favour of plaintiff’s Reliefs (1) and (3). Relief (2) for partition was not granted.