Chief Rowland Tukuru & Ors. V. Chief Nathan Sabi & Ors (2013)

LAWGLOBAL HUB Lead Judgment Report

NWALI SLYVESTER NGWUTA, J.S.C.

Endorsed on the Writ of Summons issued out of the Registry of the High Court of Rivers State, Port Harcourt Judicial Division on 22nd November, 1972 are the particulars of the plaintiffs’ claims against the defendants in Suit No.PHC/168/72:

“(i) A declaration of title of land known as OPUADINO situate at Koluama Village in Brass Division.

(ii) 400 damages for trespass in that the defendants wrongfully entered upon the said plaintiff’s land which had been in the said plaintiff’s peaceful possession, by giving it to the Nigerian Agip Oil Company Limited and by tapping palm wine on the plaintiffs’ land.

(iii) A perpetual injunction restraining the defendants from committing any further trespass on the land.”

The plaintiffs on record sued for themselves and as representing the people of Koluama Town in Brass Division. The defendants on record were sued for themselves and as representing the people of Ikebiri Town.

Pleadings were filed and exchanged by the parties. On their application the defendants were granted an order for substitution. At the end of the trial the presiding Judge Blankson, J on 18/5/92 delivered a 105 page judgment in which His Lordship concluded:

“On the whole their claims are all dismissed in their entirety.”

See page 321 of the record.

The trial Court awarded N1,000 costs against the plaintiffs to the defendants.

The plaintiffs being dissatisfied with the decision of the trial court appealed to the Court of Appeal, Port Harcourt.

In its judgment delivered on 30th March 2004 the Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal in the following terms:

“Since the claim for ownership of the land has foiled and the appellants were not found to be in exclusive possession, the claim for a permanent injunction will equally fail as it is an ancillary relief based on trespass. The evaluation of evidence made by the learned trial judge and the conclusion reached therein are not perverse and I therefore uphold them. Accordingly, I do not find any merit in this appeal. I affirm the decision of the learned trial judge and dismiss the appeal with N5,000.00 costs in favour of the respondents against the appellants.” See page 428 of the record.

Appellants were dissatisfied with the judgment of the Court below but they did not appeal within time. On their application this Court granted them extension of time within which to appeal and they did appeal to this Court on seven grounds.