Donatus Uzodinma Odoemelam V. Linus Opoko Nduka & Anor (2012)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report – COURT OF APPEAL

MOJEED ADEKUNLE OWOADE, J.C.A (Delivering the Leading Judgment)

This is an appeal against the judgment of Hon. Justice Obisike Orji sitting in the High Court of Umuahia Abia State of Nigeria in Suit No. HU/87/2001.

In his Amended statement of claim filed on 21/7/2003, the Appellant as plaintiff claimed from the Respondents jointly and severally as follows:

“(i) A Declaration that the Plaintiff is entitled to the statutory Right of occupancy in respect of the piece or parcel of land known as and called Ezi Odoemelam verged Green in Plaintiff plan situate at Umule Okaiuga in Umuahia North Local Government Area within the jurisdiction of the Honourable Court.

(ii) An order of court compelling the Defendants to complete the oral agreement entered into between the Plaintiff’s father and the defendant’s father by showing to the plaintiff another piece or parcel of land in place of that which plaintiff’s father allowed defendants father to build a residential house which piece or parcel of land plaintiff’s father got by exchange with one Boniface Nwosu.

(iii) N50, 000.00 (fifty thousand Naira) exemplary damages for trespass, and

(iv) Perpetual injunction restraining the Defendants, their servants, workmen and or agents from further trespass upon or in any manner whatsoever is interfering with the said land.”

The Respondents filed an Amended Statement of Defence which incorporated paragraphs 1 to 57 of their Statement of Defence filed on 24/2/2003 together with the Defendants survey Plan Nos. UDI/AB/D.09/2002 dated 27/6/2002.

The facts of the case are as follows. The Appellant claimed that the Respondents are on the land in dispute as mere licensees. That Anyamaele the mother of Odoemelam (the grandfather of the Appellant) and Okorienta (the father of the Respondents), mysteriously disappeared from Umule in Okaiuga Alike Ohuhu Umuahia and that it was then felt that she had been sold to slavery. That later, on one of the trading trips of Odoemelam (the grandfather of the appellant) to Bende, he found Anyamaele who told him that she was at that time married to a man from Arochukwu called Okorie.

That Odoemelam later went to Arochukwu and brought back his mother Anyamaele together with four children she had for Okorie the Arochukwu man. The said children according to him included Okorienta the father of the Respondents. That Odoemelam upon having brought them back from Arochukwu, settled them on the land in dispute as a temporary abode and gave them a piece of land outside from the land in dispute for their permanent residence, whenever they could afford it.

On another score, it is equally the Appellant’s claim that there was an uncompleted land exchange transaction between his late father Micheal Odoemelam and the late father of the Respondents – Okorienta. That the Respondents as their late father, refused to complete the land exchange transaction which had remained uncompleted and/or unconcluded at the instance of Okorienta.

The Respondents on the other hand claimed that they live on the land in dispute just like they are on all other lands that they have in Umule not as licensees of the Appellant’s late grandfather but as the owner of the lands by inheritance of same from their late father Okorienta who was a direct son of Ayoka the common father of Odoemelam, Okorienta and Ihueze from Umule Okaiuga Alike Ohuhu.

That the story of the sudden disappearance of Anyamaele from Umule and her later being brought back by Odoemelam to Umule with her four children by an Arochukwu man called Okorie (which children included Okorienta) was the Appellant’s fabrication as it never ever happened. And, that the land exchange transaction between Okorienta and Michael Chikwendu Odoemelam was concluded in their life time, each of them saw and knew the land expected to be exchanged and the exchange was subsequently and accordingly concluded.

In proof of his case before the lower court, the Appellant as plaintiff testified and called two other witnesses. On their part, the 1st Respondent also testified and called two other witnesses. The learned trial Judge, Obisiki Orji J, in a considered judgment delivered on 9th February 2005 found no merit in the Appellant’s case and accordingly dismissed it. Some of the salient reasons given by the learned trial Judge in dismissing the Appellant’s case could be found from pages 140 – 143 of the printed record. Starting from the last paragraph of page 140 to page 142.