Attorney General Of The Federation Vs Josiah O. Ajibose (1970)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report

COKER, J.S.C.

This case is a sequel to the compulsory acquisition by the Government of leasehold interests in lands comprising-
“of all those parcels of land… situate, lying and being at Iju-Adiyan in the Egbado Division of Western Nigeria portions of which lie within the Iju Water Works Catchment area.”

The original defendant to the action was the Minister of Lagos Affairs but the Attorney General of the Federation was subsequently substituted therefore in view of the present constitutional arrangements in the country. The action originated in the High Court, Ikeja (Suit No. 00185/63) where the plaintiffs, now respondents, claimed a declaration that they are the owners for an estate in fee simple absolute of the lands referred to, an order fixing 600pounds per acre per annum as a fair rental value of the said lands and for payment over the plaintiffs of such amounts found due to them in respect of the “aforementioned acquisition and previous user of the said parcels of land. ”

There is no dispute as to the occupation of the lands in question by the Government and indeed it was the case that the lands, or a substantial part of them, are at present being used as the Iju Water Works serving a rather large area of the Lagos State.

The defendant however states, and indeed contends, that the lands had already been leased to the “Colonial Government” some years back by the Alake of Abeokuta as part of the hereditary properties attaching to the throne of Ebga-land. At the trial the plaintiffs gave evidence of how they came to be owners of the lands in question. The defendant was unable to establish the title of the Alake of Abeokuta to the lands and the learned trial judge, rightly in our view, concluded that on the evidence before him the plaintiffs had established their ownership of the lands concerned.

The claim through the Alake of Abeokuta was based upon two instruments of lease, one dated 1910 and the other 1915 by which the Alake in Council had purported to grant leasehold interests in the lands concerned to the Colonial Government at the time stated in the leases.

The claim for user of the land between 1910 and 1958 was withdrawn during the trial. We point out therefore at this stage of this judgement that in the court below as well as before us, by virtue of an amendment of the claim, the case had proceeded on the basis that what the Government has now acquired, and for which compensation is being claimed, was the absolute title to the lands concerned and not any lease-hold interest by virtue of which reversionary rights may arise.

What had precipitated the present action is the fact that the Federal Government had, despite its occupation of the lands by virtue of the leases, now issued notices signifying its intention to take on leases of the lands concerned and inviting claims from those who could establish that they are entitled thereto as owners of the said lands.

After hearing both parties and in the course of a reserved judgement, Somolu, J., [as he then was], found that the lands in question belonged to the plaintiffs who have sued for themselves and on behalf of and as representatives and attorneys of all the farmers of Iju-Adiyan in Egbado Division, Western Nigeria. He observed in his judgement thus

“It follows, therefore, that nothing now debars the plaintiffs from getting their declaration of title and I hereby declare them to be the owners under native laws and custom of all the lands covered by the notice exhibit 1 and the deed of lease, exhibit 8. I also find as a fact and also in law that they are entitled to the compensation payable for them.”

The learned trial judge then proceeded to assess the monetary compensation payable to the owners in respect of the lands so acquired, payment in respect of the crops destroyed on the land having previously been made.

He decided that compensation must be assessed as at the date of the acquisition notice and before us there had been no argument as to the correctness of that decision. On this aspect of the matter the learned trial judge observed as follows

“Having given all relevant factors careful consideration,… I assess the value of the lands acquired by virtue of exhibit 1 at 450pounds per acre, because I think that if the farmers whose land were acquired at Ikeja, for example, were offered the land in dispute by the plaintiffs for purchase, they will be most willing to pay that rate for lands which, as has been admitted by witnesses, are much more fertile than their own.”

The judge then pronounced judgement in the following terms-
“There will therefore be judgement for the plaintiffs for the sum of 249,345pounds in respect of the 554.1 acres acquired in exhibit 1, or 518,805pounds for the whole area of the 1,152.9 acres which the Government claimed to hold by virtue of exhibit 8…”
The defendant has appealed to this Court against the award.