Alhaji Muritala Adisa Ajikanle & Ors V. Mohammed Yusuf (2007)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report

M. D. MUHAMMAD, J.C.A.

This judgment is in respect of the appeal and cross appeal filed against the decision of Ogun State High Court delivered on 21st February, 2000 in Suit No. HCT/174/96 dismissing the action of the plaintiffs as well as the counter-claim of the defendant therein.

The plaintiffs are the appellants before us following their notice of appeal dated 4th May, 2000 as amended while the defendant at the lower court is presently the cross-appellant vide his notice of appeal dated 15th May, 2000.

The facts of the case that brought about both appeals are as hereunder supplied.

The Plaintiffs for themselves and on behalf of the descendants’ of the Bello family of Ogunlowo claimed against the defendant as follows:

“(i) Declaration that the landed property in dispute (and all fixtures thereon) located along Akula Road, Ogun State is their inherited property;

(ii) That the Defendant is a squatter and trespasser on that family land;

(iii) An order ejecting and/or directing the defendant to vacate and give possession of the said land;

(iv) General damages for trespass and perpetual injunction.”

By an amended statement of defence and counter-claim, the defendant sought against the plaintiffs, a declaration of entitlement to the Statutory/Customary Rights of Occupancy and/or Certificate of Occupancy to the land in dispute, and perpetual injunction.

Plaintiffs and defendant will henceforth be referred to as appellants/cross-respondents and respondent/cross-appellant respectively.

Appellants’ case, from the pleadings and evidence, is that 1st appellant is the head of the Bello descendants family otherwise known as the Ali Bello family. The 2nd and 3rd appellants are principal members of the said family. The land in dispute, according to them, is part of the land allotted to Alhaja Adisatu Bello after the family property had been partitioned. Alhaja Adisatu Bello owned this partitioned portion of the family property until her death. Appellants claim that the piece of land which on Adisatu Bello’s death, reverted to the Bello descendants family is presently occupied by the respondent. Given the death intestate and the fact that Adisatu Bello had not been survived by any child, the land in dispute has reverted back to the Bello family. Appellants assert that the five year lease granted Abdul Abdullahi by the Late Adisatu Bello in 1970 stands determined by a letter dated 7th May, 1996. Abudu Abdullahi has died twenty years previously in 1976. It is appellants’ further case that all efforts made by the Late Adisatu Bello and indeed themselves to eject the respondent from the land in dispute have proved abortive.

Appellants strongly deny that the land in dispute had been sold either by Adisatu Bello or the appellants either to Abudu Abdullahi or anyone else around 1980.

Respondent’s/cross-appellant’s case, on the other hand, is that he neither knew the appellants nor anyone of them as the head or member of the Bello family. He inherited the land in dispute from his mother who in turn acquired title from Abudu Abdullahi the original lessee. The leasee agreement is dated 14-01-70. Respondent claims that he was put into possession of the land in dispute by the said Abudu on the very 14-01- 70.