Ibrahim Hamza V. Lawan and Yusuf (2006)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report

MUHAMMAD, J.C.A.

On the 15th day of April, 1993, the appellant herein, as plaintiff at the Wudil Area Court (trial court), told the trial court that he was sueing one Lawan and other legal heirs of Hamza (plaintiff’s father), seeking the court to divide the estate left behind by Hamza who died 13 months ago. Hamza left behind one house situated at Italiya Hausawa. He left behind as heirs three sons: Ibrahim (the plaintiff), Lawan (1st defendant) and Yusuf; five daughters who are: Hansatu, Tsaiba, Rakiya, Sahura and Halima. He also left behind two wives: Binta and A’1. One Alasan was another son to Hamza but he predeceased Hamza.

In response to the claim, 1st respondent herein as 1st defendant at the trial court stated that before his death, Hamza divided the said house into portions and gave to the appellant, one Yusuf, one Alasan and himself (1st defendant). These were all male children of the deceased Hamza. Each of them built up his portion and took occupation thereof. What remained of the house was where Hamza (the deceased) lived till his death. The trial court sought for clarification from the plaintiff in view of the response by the 1st defendant whether he was claiming the whole house or only the area where the deceased (Hamza) lived till his death. The plaintiff replied:

“The said whole house up to the place where he has stated he has given because he has not given to anyone.”

As there was dispute over the identity of the subject matter, the trial court moved its sitting to the locus inquo. The court directed all legal heirs to attend the locus inquo. The trial court was at the locus inquo on 27/4/93 it explained its mission to the heirs. The children and wife of Alasan who predeceased Hamza were also present at the locus inquo. The trial court put all the heirs including heirs to Alasan, what Lawan, 1st defendant stated. Each of them responded as follows:

Yusuf: What Lawan stated is true.

Hansatu: Whether he has given to them or not, I have forgiven them. I wish the court to allow me to go and I am not seeking anything about the said house.

Rakiya: What Lawan stated, whether it is true or not, I have forgiven, I am not seeking anything about the subject matter of the house.

Halima: I wanted the distribution in order to give my share.

Tsaiba: The court saw her in the house suffering from mental sickness and could not take her response.

Representative of A’i: What the court has pleased. I do not know whether they were given or not.

Binta: I have known that he has divided the said house for them.

Let me hasten to observe at this juncture that from the Record of Appeal before this Court, the above listed persons including the plaintiff and defendant were the surviving heirs to late Hamza.

The trial court however, in its wisdom went ahead to entertain responses to 1st defendant’s claim of gift of portions of land by Hamza to his male children from the heirs of late Alasan (a son who predeceased Hamza) other heirs to late Hamza. Below are their responses:-