Alhaja Jaratu Abeje V. Alhaji Tijani Alade & Anor. (2010)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report

SIDI DAUDA BAGE, J.C.A.

The appeal arose from the judgment of the High Court of Justice, Oyo State, sitting at Ibadan (hereinafter called ‘The trial Court’), delivered by Honourable Justice O. O. Adesina, J. of 29th August, 1996 wherein the claims of the Plaintiff, now Appellant, was dismissed in its entirety with costs assessed in favour of the Respondents.

Being dissatisfied with the judgment of the trial Court, the Appellant originally filed a Notice of Appeal of Eight Grounds and later filed an Amended Notice of Appeal on the June, 2006, pursuant to the Order of this Court of 6th June, 2006 containing Ten (10) Grounds of Appeal.

The background facts are as stated hereunder. The Appellant in her Amended Statement of Claim, stated that, the land in dispute was partitioned to the 1st Respondent and herself. She stated that, their ancestor, one Ogungbayi, had 3 children namely:- Bakare and 2 other sons. Bakare had 3 wives and was survived by 6 children, 4 from one wife and the remaining 2 bore 1 child each. The 4 children from the 1st wife were the Appellant, the 1st Respondent and 2 others. The Appellant further stated that the land left by Ogungbayi, was 6 (Six) acres and was partitioned into 3 (Three)groups of two acres each for each of the children of Ogungbayi. The two (2) acres for Bakare was shared into two of one acre each for the children of the 1st wife, hence, the Appellant and the 1st Respondent had an acre each in the land in dispute. The remaining one acre was given to the remaining two children of the 1st wife. Nothing for the children of the other wives. She argued that, the land in dispute did not belong to the larger family.

The 1st Respondent argued that, the land was granted to him by the representatives of the three (3) branches of Ogungbayi Family when he approached them for his share when he found that the family was selling all the family land. There was an agreement (Exhibit ‘A”) and that, he obtained Certificate of occupancy on the land and that, he granted a long lease to the 2nd Respondent. He denied that, the family land had ever been partitioned. Even PW1 joined in granting him the land in dispute.

At the conclusion of trial, the learned trial Judge dismissed the Appellant’s case. Being dissatisfied with the judgment, the Appellant filed this appeal on a Ten (10) Amended Grounds of Appeal.

The Appellant submits that the following Issues arise for determination in this appeal having regard to the judgment of the trial Court and the Grounds of Appeal.

(1) Whether the judgment of the trial Court can be said to be based on the claim before the Court? – Grounds 9 and 10.

(2) Whether the facts that the children of other section of the Bakare Branch of Ogungbayi Family were excluded from the partitioning of the Ogungbayi Family land was in issue before the trial Court?

Ground 4.

(3) Whether from the evidence before the trial Court in this case, it is correct as held by the trial Court that the Plaintiff did not place sufficient facts of partitioning of Ogungbayi Family before the Court and that the property of Bakare Section of Ogungbayi Family was never partitioned? Grounds 1, 2, 3, 7 and 8.

(4) Whether from the pleadings and evidence before the trial Court, the Plaintiff (Appellant) and the 1st Defendant (1st Respondent) can be said to have joint interest in the land in dispute? Grounds 5 and 6.

The 1st Respondent on his part formulated Four (4) Issues for determination. The Issues are as follows:-

(1) Whether the judgment of the trial Court can be said to be based on the claim before the Court? Grounds 9 and 10.