Engr. Femi Sonuga & Anor V. The Minister, Federal Capital Territory, Abuja & Anor (2010)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report – COURT OF APPEAL

JIMI OLUKAYODE BADA, J.C.A (Delivering the Leading Judgment)

This is an appeal against the Judgment of the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja in Suit No. – FCT/HC/CV/129/06 delivered on the 17th day of December 2007.

The Appellants as Plaintiffs by an action commenced at the lower Court claimed against the Respondents jointly and severally the following reliefs:-

“(1) A declaration that the Plaintiffs are the beneficial owners of Plot 530, Cadastral Zone B4, Jabi District, Jabi, Abuja and covered by Certificate of Occupancy issued on the 31st day of August 2005 and registered as No. 9182 at page 9182 in Volume 16 in the Land Registry Office, Abuja.

(2) A declaration that the demolition of the Plaintiffs property on Plot 530 Cadastral Zone B4, Jabi District Abuja by the Defendants is malicious, illegal and constitutes an unlawful trespass on the Plaintiff’s property.

(3) A perpetual injunction restraining the Defendants, their servants, agents, privies, officers or howsoever called from trespassing or further trespassing on the Plaintiffs’ property situate and known as Plot 530, Cadastral Zone B4, Jabi District Abuja and/or in any way in interfering with Plaintiffs’ right of ownership of the said plot and peaceful enjoyment thereof.

(4) N50 Million (Fifty Million Naira) Exemplary, Special and General Damages for the tort of trespass and destruction of Plaintiffs’ property.

(5) N1.5 Million Naira cost of legal representation.

(6) Cost of this Suit.

In a considered Judgment, the learned trial Judge held that the demolition of the Plaintiffs’ property on Plot 530 Cadastral Zone B4, Jabi District, Abuja by the Defendants is illegal and unlawful and does constitute a trespass.

The Court awarded the sum of One Million Naira in favour of the Plaintiffs, being exemplary, special and general damages for the tort of trespass and destruction of the Plaintiffs’ property by the Defendants.

The Appellants being dissatisfied with the Judgment of the lower Court now appealed to this Court.

The learned Counsel for the Appellants formulated four issues for determination set out as follows:-

“(1) Whether the Defendants/Respondents procedure of filing their Statement of Defence after the Plaintiffs/Appellants have closed their case is not alien and unknown to procedural rules of Justice. (Distilled from Grounds 1 & 2).