Afolarin Adenle V. Folarin Olude (2002)

LAWGLOBAL HUB Lead Judgment Report

S.O. UWAIFO,  JSC. 

This is an appeal from a judgment of the Court of Appeal, Lagos Division, given on 17 July, 1997. The judgment overturned that of the trial court delivered on 5 November, 1993. The case concerns a parcel of land known as plot 61 A in the Iyade Family Layout, off Airport Road, Ikeja, Lagos. The plaintiff claims that the parcel of land was sold to him on 8 April, 1971, by the duly accredited representatives of the said Iyade family, evidenced by a purchase receipt, Exhibit A. Later, by a deed dated 13th May, 1971 (Exhibit C), the land was conveyed to him. But because the defendant subsequently laid claim to the said land by purchase from the same Iyade family, as per purchase receipt dated 6 August, 1971, (Exhibit E), followed by a deed of conveyance dated 3 April, 1978, (Exhibit F), the plaintiff sued for (a) a declaration that he is the owner of the said plot 61A now known as No. 2 Oladosun Street, Ikeja, Lagos, shown in Iyade Family Allotment plan No. ITPA 0448 of 17 July, 1969, which plot is covered by a deed of conveyance dated 13th May, 1971, registered as No.4 at page 4 in volume 13355 of the Register of deed kept in the Lands Registry in the office at Lagos and (b) an order of perpetual injunction restraining the defendant whether by himself or his servants or agents from the land.

On 5 November, 1993, in a considered judgment, the learned trial Judge (Obadina, J,) dismissed the plaintiff’s claim. The plaintiff appealed to the Court of Appeal. On 17th July, 1997, that court allowed the appeal and gave judgment for the plaintiff as per the reliefs sought. The defendant, hereafter referred to as the appellant, has appealed to this court and set down the following issues for determination:

1. Whether the lower court was right in making comparison between Exhibits A, B and C and thus coming to the conclusion that D. W. 1 was a signatory to both Exhibits A and C.
2. Whether the lower court was right in coming to the conclusion that the area of land in dispute was very clear and concise.
3. Whether the lower court was right in holding that the plaintiff satisfactorily proved his case.

From the pleading and evidence of the plaintiff, hereafter referred to as the respondent, the Iyade family made a layout of their land in Ikeja as per a plan No. I.T.P.A. 0448 dated 17th July, 1969, drawn by a licensed surveyor, one O. Adekunle Kukoyi (para. 5 of amended statement of claim). Although the appellant specifically denied this averment (para. 3 of the statement of defence), the head of Iyade Family, Momodu Ilo, the Olu of Ikeja (D.W.l), in his testimony under cross-examination said:

Our land was in a layout. I cannot remember the name of the surveyor that made it. We had two surveyors, namely (l) Kukoyi. (sic) The layout of the land in dispute was made by Kukoyi.

It is thus clear that Iyade family land was laid out.

As regards the number of the layout plan, it is necessary to first refer to an aspect of the said D.W.1’s evidence, again in cross-examination, as follows:

I know Mr. Odunsi. He built a house on one of our plots in the layout ….. We sold the land to him. I see Exhibit D’ now shown to me. It is a conveyance made for Mr. Odunsi. It bears our signature.

Exhibit D, a deed of conveyance dated 24 June, 1970 and registered No. 45 at page 45 in volume 1323 of the Lands Registry in the Office at Lagos contains inter alia the following:

…….. [The Vendors as Beneficial Owners hereby convey unto the purchaser all that piece or parcel of land described as plots 6 & 7 in the Iyade family Allotment Plan No. I.T.P.A. 0448 of 17th July, 1969, situate lying and being at Ikeja, Lagos State……………

This finally establishes the fact that Iyade family made a layout as per plan No. I.T.P.A. 0448.

The respondent’s case is that plot No. 61 A in the said layout was conveyed to him by the head of Iyade family (D.W.1) and principal members of that family as per a deed of conveyance dated 13 May, 1971, and registered as No. 4 at page 4 in volume

13355 (Exhibit C). But the said D.W.1 denied having signed Exhibit C. He said in cross-examination, after acknowledging his signature on Exhibit D, a deed of conveyance by which land was sold to one Mr. Odunsi who testified as P.W.2:

I can recognise my signature on any other document. I see Exhibit C’ now shown to me. The signature therein is not my signature. It was written by Mr. Odunsi because when Mr. Odunsi came to us about a plot to his relation, we told him there was no other plot to sell.