Busari Ojogbede V. Oba Yinusa Ogundipe & Anor. (2007)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report

JOHN AFOLABI FABIYI, J.C.A.

This is an appeal against the ruling delivered by Bolaji-Yusuff, J. while sitting at the High Court of Justice, Ibadan in Oyo State of Nigeria on 30th January, 2003. The learned trial judge found the appellant’s action premature and incompetent. The suit was struck out.

As plaintiff at the trial court, the appellant herein, claimed in paragraph 32 of the statement of claim as follows:

“(i) Declaration that the plaintiff is the person entitled to be appointed as the Baale of Atan Village.

(ii) Declaration that the appointment of the second defendant by the first defendant as Baale of Atan Community is wrong, unlawful, null and void in so far as the appointment was contrary to customary law, practice and usage and against the custom of Atan Community.

(iii) Declaration that the appointment of the 2nd defendant is wrong unlawful and it is also null and void as it was made when Suit No. I/411/98 ALABI ADEEYO WINSOLA v. BUSARI OJOGBEDE instituted by the 2nd defendant against the plaintiff was pending by the time 2nd defendant was appointed Baale of (sic) by the 1st Defendant.

(iv) Declaration that the appointment of the 2nd defendant by the first as Baale of Atan Community is illegal, wrong, null and void for the failure of the 2nd defendant to disclose to the 1st defendant that suit no. 1/411/98 ALABI ADEEYO WINSOLA v. BUSARI OJOGBEDE was pending at the time the first defendant appointed him as Baale of Atan.

(v) An order of perpetual injunction restraining the 1st defendant and or Olubadan in Council from further recognizing the second defendant as Baale of Atan Community in Akinyele Local Government.

(vi) An order of perpetual injunction restraining the second defendant from parading himself as Baale of Atan Community in Akinyele Local Government Area and or performing the duties of Baale of Atan Community in Akinyele Local Government.

(vii) An order quashing the appointment of the second defendant as Baale of Atan Community made on 17th day of April, 2000 by the first defendant as it is contrary to native law and custom including customary law of Atan Community.”

Parties filed and exchanged their pleadings at the trial court. From the statement of claim, it is extant that the plaintiff claimed that his father was the first settler at Atan Village and was administering same. He asserted that Winsola had no land or building at Atan Village and as such, the 2nd respondent has no claim whatsoever to the Baaleship of Atan Village. He maintained that after the inhabitants of Atan village requested for the appointment of a Baale, he was chosen and his name was forwarded to the 1st Respondent, the prescribed authority for his approval. He asserted that while waiting for the 1st respondent’s approval and confirmation of his appointment as Baale of Atan village, the 2nd respondent instituted Suit No. I/411/98 against him. He claimed that it was during the pendency of the suit that the 1st respondent approved the appointment of the 2nd respondent.

On his own part, the 2nd defendant, a descendant of Winsola, maintained that he is the current Baale of Atan village in Akinyele Local Government of Oyo State. The plaintiff is challenging his nomination and appointment by the 1st defendant. The 2nd defendant claimed that Winsola, his ancestor settled at Atan village a long time ago. Some people later joined him and he allocated land to them as his tenants. Later the ancestor of the plaintiff, one Ojogbede, who came from Ilesha was brought to Winsola by one Pa Oloyede. The 2nd defendant claimed that on 6-12-99, the entire members of Winsola Family nominated him for the post of Baale of Atan Village. The 1st defendant later gave his consent to the nomination.

Before then, the plaintiff had been parading himself as the Baale of Atan village. The 2nd defendant filed Suit I/411/98 against the plaintiff. He was reported to the Olubadan of Ibadan and he denied parading himself as the Baale. The 2nd defendant then discontinued his action on 25-7-2000 by filing a notice of discontinuance.

The plaintiff later filed this action challenging the nomination and approval of his appointment by the 1st respondent, the prescribed authority.