Asani Balogun & Ors. v. Alimi Agboola (1974)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report

B. A. COKER, J.S.C. 

This appeal is sequel to proceedings initiated in the High Court, Ibadan, by one Yesufu Mogaji Oshundina as plaintiff against one James Fadokun Fakorede. On the writ as filed, the plaintiff sued “for himself and on behalf of the Ebo Olobi Family”. The writ was endorsed as follows:

”The plaintiffs are the owner of all that piece or parcel of land situate lying and being at Ibadan off Abeokuta Road and more accurately delineated on a plan to be filed with the statement of claim in this action and an injunction restraining the said defendants, their servants and agents from entering the said land without the permission of the plaintiffs.”

In the course of the proceedings, and by virtue of Orders of Court duly made in connection, the following events took place:

(i) Baba Lawani, alias Lawani Molade Akanmu, and Raji Offa were added as plaintiffs “for themselves and as representatives of the other occupiers of the land in dispute”.

(ii) Yesufu Mogaji Oshundina, the original plaintiff died and Asani Balogun (now respondent before us) was substituted for him; and

(iii) The original defendant, James Fadokun Fakorede, died before the hearing of the suit and one Raji Fakorede was substituted for him.

After the judgment in the High Court, and during the pendency of the appeal in the Western State Court of Appeal, Raji Kakorede himself died and Alimi Agboola (now appellant before us) was substituted for him as the defendant to the action. In this judgment, we would characterise the parties as plaintiffs and defendants according to the designation in the High Court, Ibadan. The plaintiffs filed a statement of claim by which they aver that the plaintiffs’ family comprise of the descendants of the late Chief Osi Oshundina who originally owned the land in dispute and surrounding lands and whose children, like himself, exercised various acts of ownership and possession over the said land by

(i) Farming;

(ii) granting of occupational rights to various persons;

(iii) granting of lands to the Roman Catholic Mission; and (iv) making surveys of the lands in dispute.

The defendants also filed their own pleadings by which they denied that the plaintiffs ever exercised any acts of ownership and/or possession over the lands in dispute and, in particular, by paragraph 7 of their statement of defence, the defendants aver as follows:

“7. The defendant will establish at the trial that

(a) It is the defendant and his predecessors in title in dispute and that the existing Catholic School is on the site of the ruins of defendant’s ancient village;