Dr. Abdulrasheed Alanamu V. Yakub Agbo & Ors. (2012)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report – COURT OF APPEAL

TIJJANI ABDULLAHI J.C.A. (Delivering the Leading Judgment)

This is an appeal against the decision of the Kwara State, High Court of Justice, holding at Ilorin delivered on the 30th March, 2010 by M. A. Akoja (J), wherein the Appellant’s case was dismissed against the Respondents herein. In the judgment appealed against the learned trial Judge held inter-alia thus:

“It is to be remembered that the issue of declaration of title had been very well treated in this judgment and it has been held that the claimant failed to plead an prove by evidence the origin and title of his vendor, hence he has failed to prove a valid and better title against the defendants herein.

Accordingly, the case of the claimant failed and same is dismissed.”

Aggrieved with the decision reproduced above, the Appellant approached this Court and expressed so by filing a Notice of Appeal containing seven grounds of appeal from which he distilled three issues for determination to wit:

“(i). Whether having regard to the totality of evidence before the lower Court, coupled with the inconsistency nature of the evidence of the Respondents’ witnesses the learned trial judge was right to have dismissed the Appellant’s case in its entirety (Grounds 1, 2, 3, 4 & 6)

(ii) Whether the trial Court has not failed in its sacred duty to evaluate or make findings on his observation at the locus in quo before arriving at his Judgment and whether the failure has not occasioned a miscarriage of justice against the Appellant (Ground 5).

(iii) Whether the Judgment of the lower court was not perverse and occasioned a miscarriage of justice against the Appellant having regard to its failure to attached (sic) any probative value to the act of long possession established by the Appellant (Ground 7).

For his Part, learned Counsel for the Respondents, after arguing a point of preliminary objection without filing a Notice to that effect as he is enjoined to do by the Rules of this Court, formulated two issues for determination thus:

“1. Whether considering the state of pleadings and evidence before it, the lower Court was right in dismissing the Appellant’s case while upholding the traditional history/evidence of the Respondents – Grounds 1, 2, 3, 4 and 6.

2. Whether the lower Court was not justified in its treatment of the Appellant’s purported acts of possession and ownership either in evidence or in observations at the locus in quo and whether same has occasioned any miscarriage of justice in the circumstances – Grounds 5 and 7.

It is appropriate at this junction to pause and state albeit briefly the facts of the case that gave rise to the appeal under consideration. They are that:- The Appellant at the lower Court instituted this suit against the Defendants (hereinafter referred to as “the Respondents,) claiming ownership, damages and injunction in respect of a piece or parcel of land measuring 50ft x 200ft (61.00n x 60:97m x 15.3m x 15.06m, 920.367Sqm) situate, lying and being at Tanke Iledu, along University permanent site Road, Tanke, Ilorin, Kwara State.

The Appellant’s basis of his claim to the entitlement of the reliefs being sought is hinged on a Deed of Conveyance made in 1977 between him and one Alhaji Baba Alao. The Appellant further claims to have been exercising right of ownership over the land and that he further attempted to enhance his title thereof by obtaining a Certificate of Registration in respect of same i.e Exhibit 14.

It is the contention of the Appellant that after the demise of the vendor, Alhaji Baba Alao, the Respondents started disturbing him on the land.

On the other hand, it is the case of the Respondents that the land in question belongs to the 1st Respondent’s family vide traditional history. The Respondents further established that the land does not belong to Tanke Ifedu family at all and that Alhaji Baba Alao was neither a member of the 1st Respondent’s family nor a member of Tanke Iledu family and never had the authority of the Respondent’s family to deal in the said land.