Ephraim Okoli Dim V. Isaac Enemuo (2009)

LAWGLOBAL HUB Lead Judgment Report

M. CHUKWUMA-ENEH, J.S.C.

From the instant record of appeal the Plaintiff claims in this suit in the High Court of Anambra State against the Defendant, a declaration of title, damages for trespass and injunction. Pleadings have been filed and exchanged between the parties. At trial court, the Plaintiff called 4 witnesses to prove his case. The Defendant’s only witness called in the case is an Assistant Chief Registrar of the High Court to tender the judgment in Suit No.AA/19/74 which among other exhibits has been admitted in evidence and marked Exhibit’ “E” At the conclusion of the oral hearing the parties have addressed the court.

In a considered judgment the trial court in dismissing the plaintiff’s claim in toto has found for the Defendant. Aggrieved by the decision the Plaintiff has appealed to the Court of Appeal, Enugu Division (lower court). The Lower Court having allowed the appeal, it set aside the decision of the High Court. Dissatisfied with the decision, the Defendant has now appealed the decision of the lower court by a Notice of Appeal filed on 6/3/2002 containing 12 ground of appeal.

In this court the Plaintiff and Defendant are respectively designated as appellant and respondent. In compliance with the Rules of this Court the Appellant and the Respondent have filed and exchanged their respective briefs of argument in the appeal. In the Appellant’s brief of argument have been distilled five issues for determination and they are as follows:

“(a) Whether the Court of Appeal was right in reversing the judgment of the learned trial Chief judge in view of the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case?

(b Whether the Court of Appeal was right in the treatment and conclusion on Exhibit E?

(c) Whether the Court of Appeal was correct in holding that Defendant had the duty to prove that he belonged to Umuike family of Okpu town and that he is the undisputed owner exercising maximum and numerous acts of ownership therein and, that the Defence conceded to the Plaintiff’s ownership of the disputed land?

(d) Whether the Court of Appeal was right in raising some weighty issues suo motu and deciding same without hearing the parties thereon?

(e) Whether the Court of Appeal rightly rejected Exhibit E as constituting estoppel per Rem judicata or even issue estoppel?”

The Respondent has filed a brief of argument; even though the issues for determination raised therein are substantially identical to the Appellant’s, all the same, for completeness they are set out as follows:

“1. Whether the judgment of the Court of Appeal was right when no evidence is led by the Defendant in support of his pleadings.

Whether Exhibit “E” qualifies to operate as estoppel per Rem judicata in this case.

Whether pronouncing on all issues placed before the court amount to raising issues suo motu by the court.

Whether the Court of Appeal was right in reversing the High Court judgment when the same is perverse.”