Aladesae & Anor v. Adejuwon & Ors (2022)

LAWGLOBAL HUB Lead Judgment Report – SUPREME COURT

MOHAMMED LAWAL GARBA, J.S.C. (Delivering the Lead Judgment)

The 1st and 2nd Respondents’ Suit No. HID/3/2003 before the High Court of Ekiti State, sitting at Ido-Ekiti (trial Court), against the Appellants and the other Respondents for declarations and injunction in respect of the appointment to the traditional stool of Olojudo of Ido-Ekiti, was dismissed by the trial Court for being statute barred on the 20th of July, 2005, as borne out at pages 107 – 115 of the Record of Appeal.

During the pendency of the aforenamed suit, by the writ of summons dated the 4th of October, 2004, the 1st and 2nd Respondents also instituted the Suit No. HID/14/2004 before the trial Court against the same parties and on the same issues, substantially, which was dismissed as an abuse of the Court process and statute barred in the ruling dated 14th December, 2006, at pages 76 – 77 of the Record of Appeal.

Not deterred by the outcome of the two (2) suits instituted against the parties therein, the 1st and 2nd Respondents yet again, filed the Suit No. HAD/113/2007, this time at the High Court, Ado-Ekiti, by which they sought for order declaring the Olojudo Chieftaincy Declaration dated 6th December, 1989 was contrary to Ido native law and custom, irregular, illegal, null and void. In the alternative, an amendment to the said declaration was sought.

In a ruling dated 3rd March, 2009 on the objection raised by the Appellants, the Ado-Ekiti High Court, found the suit to constitute an abuse of Court process, stated that “it is on that ground liable to be struck out” and then “It is so ordered”.

Then, by the Motion on Notice dated 11th, but filed on the 14th of May, 2009, the 1st and 2nd Respondents approached the Court of Appeal, Ilorin Division, (the Court below) for the following reliefs:-
“(a) An Order for enlargement of time to the Applicants within which to appeal against the decision of the High Court of Justice, Ido-Ekiti, Ekiti State, delivered by Hon. Justice M. A. Agbolusi, on the 20th day of July, 2005.
(b) An Order Enlarging the time within which the Appellants may file their Notice of Appeal and grounds of appeal in this case; and
(c) For such further order or other orders as this Honourable Court may deem fit to make in the circumstances of this case.”

GROUNDS FOR THE APPLICATION
(a) The Applications having failed to appeal within the time allowed by Section 24 of the Court of Appeal Act, are entitled to bring this application Under Order 7 Rule 1 of the Court of Appeal Rules 2007 to enable them exercise their Constitutional right of appeal as provided for under 241, 1(a) of the 1999 Constitution.
(b) The proposed Notice of Appeal disclosed arguable and well deserving grounds of appeal upon which this application is predicated.”

The 3rd and 6th Respondents opposed the motion and filed a Counter-Affidavit on the 18th of May, 2009 while the Applicants filed a further Affidavit in support of the motion on 14th January, 2010.

In the ruling delivered on the 29th of March, 2010, the Court below granted the reliefs sought and ordered that the Notice of Appeal be filed within thirty (30) days from then.

Aggrieved by the grant of the motion, the Appellants, who were the Plaintiffs in the Suit No. HID/3/2003, brought this appeal vide the notice and grounds of appeal dated and filed on 1st April, 2010 on the following grounds:-

“Ground 1
The learned Justice of the Court of Appeal erred in law when the granted leave and extension of time to appeal to 1st and 2nd Respondents when there exist to cogent, good and reasonable reasons for granting same.
Ground 2
The learned Justice of the Court of Appeal erred in law when they failed to follow the decision in IKENTA BEST (NIG.) LTD VS A.G. RIVER STATE (2008) 6 NWLR (PT 1084) 612 @ 649.”

In line with the requirements of the rules of the Court, briefs of argument were filed by learned counsel representing the parties to the appeal as follows:-

1. As filed on 25th of June, 2010;
2. 1st and 2nd Respondents’ brief filed on the 5th of July, 2010;
3. The 3rd and 5th Respondents’ brief was filed on 8th of March, 2022;
4. 6th Respondent’s brief was filed on 29th March, 2022; and
5. Amended Respondents’ brief to the 1st and 2nd brief was filed on the 20th of August, 2010.

All the briefs were deemed as properly filed by the Court on the 6th of April, 2022 and adopted by learned counsel for the parties as the submissions in support of their respective positions, at the hearing of the appeal on the 11th April, 2022.

At the conference of the Hon. Justices on the panel of the Court that heard the appeal, it was observed that the decision by the Court below, the subject of the appeal, was made in the exercise of the judicial discretion of that Court in the application by the 1st and 2nd Respondents for extension of time to appeal.