Henry Atuchukwu V. Gloria Adindu (2011)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report – COURT OF APPEAL

HELEN MORONKEJI OGUNWUMIJU, J.C.A. (Delivering the Leading Judgment)

This is an appeal against the judgment of the High Court of Abia State sitting at Osisioma Ngwa Judicial Division delivered by Hon. Justice E. N. Ejelonu J. on 17th February, 2006. The facts that led to this appeal are as follows:

By Writ of Summons filed on 14/4/2004 and Amended Statement of Claim filed on 28/2/2005, the Respondent as Plaintiff in the Lower Court claimed at Page 81 of the record as follows:

“a) Declaration that the Plaintiff is entitled to a grant of statutory Right of Occupancy over a piece or parcel of land known as and called Egbelu Umuatako (4 plots) lying at Egbelu Umuatako in Osisioma Ngwa Local Govt. within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court.

b) Ten Million Naira damages against the Defendant for trespass;

c) An Order of Court setting aside any purported Power of Attorney granted to the Defendant by any member of Umuatako family or any other person.

Perpetual Injunction restraining the Defendant, his agents, servants, workers or anybody claiming through him from further entry into the land.”

The Respondent filed a 10 paragraph Amended Statement of Claim and the Appellant filed a 3 paragraph Statement of Defence. The Respondent gave evidence and called 3 witnesses while the Appellant gave evidence and called a witness. At the end of the trial, the learned trial judge made the following orders:

1. The Plaintiff is entitled to a grant of statutory Right of Occupancy over a piece or parcel of land known as and called Egbelu Umuatako situate and lying at Egbelu Umuatako in Osisioma Ngwa Local Governemnt.
2. N850,000.00 cost is awarded against the Defendant for trespass.
3. The Power of Attorney granted to the Defendant by any member of Umuatako family or any other person is hereby set aside.
4. The Defendant, his agents, servants, workers or anybody claiming through him is perpetually restrained from further entry into the said land.

Hence this appeal. The Appellant’s brief is dated 22/10/07 filed on 25/10/07. The Appellant also filed a Reply brief dated 29/5/08 filed on 30/5/08. The Respondent filed a Respondent’s brief dated 18/2/08 on 22/2/08. It was deemed filed on 15/5/08. The Appellant identified four issues for determination set out as follows:

1. Whether the lower court, bereft of any delineation, was right to award title over the largely undisputed Egbelu Umuatako land to the Respondent who claimed only “4 plots” of land therein (GROUND. I)
2. Whether the exact metreage, dimension and boundaries of the “4 plots” of land claimed by the Respondent are ascertained from the pleadings and evidence adduced at the trial, to warrant grant of declaration and injunctive reliefs, etc. (GROUND ii)
3. Whether the findings of forgery of Appellant’s title documents and refusal of the equitable defence of laches and acquiescence, are sustainable on the pleadings and evidence adduced. (GROUNDS I, III, V)
4. Whether the findings of the lower court are sustainable without any evaluation of evidence extracted under cross-examination which faulted the identity/credibility of the Respondent and her witnesses (GROUND IV)

The Respondent formulated five issues set out as follows:

(a) Whether the learned trial judge did not regard, consider or evaluate the defence of title and laches/acquiescence when delivering judgment. – Ground (i)

(b) Whether considering the plaintiff’s pleadings and evidence led at the trial, the boundaries of the 4 plots of land were in issue to warrant the grant of the declarative and injunctive reliefs sought by the plaintiff. – Ground (ii).

(c) Whether the learned trial judge correctly adjudged exhibit D5 as found on forgery in view of the facts pleaded and evidence led at the trial. – Ground (iii)

(d) Whether the learned trial judge was right to hold that “the point of the signature have no bearing to the central issue” in the course of delivering judgment.-Ground (iv).