Alhaji Aliyu Muhammad Hadejia V. Alhaji Bafale Abbas (2016)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report – COURT OF APPEAL

IBRAHIM SHATA BDLIYA, J.C.A. (Delivering the Leading Judgment)

The appellant (the plaintiff at the lower Court) claimed that he bought the parcel of land in dispute from Muhammed Shahada in 1983.? That the parcel of land was allocated to him by the Hadejia Local Government. A certificate of occupancy was issued to him by the Ministry of Lands, Kano State. In 2004, he discovered that the respondent (defendant at the lower Court) had trespassed in to the parcel of land.?

The respondent asserted that he purchased the land from one Yusuf Garba in 2004. That Yusuf Garba purchased the parcel of land from the original allottee who was allocated the land in 1973 by Hadejia Native Authority and a certificate of occupancy was issued to him by Kano State Ministry of Work and Survey in 1975.

? The appellant being dissatisfied with the claim of the respondent, instituted an action before the High Court of Jigawa State (the lower Court) against the respondent. The respondent counter-claimed against the appellant. After taking of evidence from the parties and addresses of learned counsel, the lower Court delivered its judgment on the 22nd

of December, 2010, dismissing the claims of the appellant, and granted the counter-claim of the respondent. Dissatisfied with the judgment of the lower Court, the appellant filed Notice and grounds of appeal to this Court on the 22nd of March, 2011 which was amended on the 22nd of May, 2013.

The appellant’s brief of argument was filed on the 7th of June 2013. The respondent’s brief of argument was filed on the 10th of November 2015. A Reply brief was filed by the appellant on the 1st of February 2016.?The appeal was argued on the 3rd of February, 2016 whereat, learned counsel to the appellant adopted the brief of argument, and did urge the Court to allow the appeal, and set aside the judgment of the lower Court.

Learned counsel to the respondent did adopt the brief of argument, and urged the Court to dismiss the appeal and affirm the judgment of the lower Court. Four (4) issues have been distilled from the grounds of appeal on page 2 of the appellant’s brief of argument for determination. They are thus:

“(1) Whether the learned trial Judge was right to dismiss the appellants claims on the bases of inter alia.?DW2’s evidence and

then enter judgment for the respondent on his counterclaim on the quality of the evidence he adduced?

(2) Whether the learned trial Judge’s failure to consider the appellants Reply and Defence to counterclaim amounted to a breach of his right to fair hearing which occasioned a miscarriage of justice?

(3) Whether the learned trial Judge by suo motu raising the issues of the purported in authenticity of Exhibit 12 and lack of governors consent without inviting the parties and their lawyers to address the same breached the right to fair hearing and occasioned a miscarriage of justice?

(4) whether the learned trial Judge having found that the appellant had failed to prove his case should not have entered a non-suit on the basis of the respondent also failing to prove his own?”

The respondent adopted the 4 issues contained in the appellant’s brief of argument.

RESOLUTION OF ISSUES