Isaiah Robert & Ors. V. Oba Moses Olaleye & Ors. (2010)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report

PAUL ADAMU GALINJE, J.C.A.

The claims of the Respondents herein, who were the Plaintiffs at the Lagos State High Court (henceforth to be referred to as the lower Court or the Court below) as endorsed at paragraph 52 of their Amended Statement of Claim dated and filed on the 3rd of July, 1999 at the lower Court are as follows:-

“(i) A declaration that the plaintiffs are entitled to a right of occupancy whether statutory or customary, pursuant to the land use Decree/Edict 1978, for all that portion of land situate at Lagos-Badagry Express Way bounded on the north by plaintiff’s village, in the south by Akinyeye Palmgroove, on the east by toil (sic) gate and beyond, on the west by Oko-Afo/plaintiff’s village, more particularly shown and described by survey plan No. LSAT/037/99, verged red, drawn by W. Adeniyi, licensed Surveyor.

(ii) The sum of N50,000.00 being damages for trespass to the said land and;

(iii) Injunction restraining the Defendants, their servants, agents or other members of Ale Community from trespass or repeating the same.”

The Appellants as Defendants at the lower Court denied the claims of the Respondents in their Amended Statement of Defence dated and filed on the 31st day of July, 2002. At paragraph 43 of the said Amended Statement of Defence, the Appellants counterclaimed as follows:-

“(1) Declaration that Defendants are the persons entitled to the statutory or customary right of occupancy to all that large parcel of land shown on the Defendants’ survey plan NO. RL.5/LA/2000 dated 14/2/2000 drawn by Mr. R. O. A. Lawal Registered Surveyor and all other Defendants’ survey plan No. LSAT/037/99 dated 10/5/99 drawn by Mr. Adeniyi, Registered Surveyor.

(2) A sum of N100,000.00 as Damages for plaintiffs’ trespass on the land.

(3) Injunction restraining the plaintiffs, their servants, agents and/or privies from committing any further trespass on the land.”

Pleadings were appropriately exchanged and this case proceeded to trial. At the end of the trial and addresses on both sides, the trial Judge, in a reserved and considered judgment which was delivered on the 28th of September, 2004, declared that the Respondents are the persons entitled to the grant of a right of occupancy over the disputed piece of land. In addition, the Plaintiffs are awarded N30,000.00 as damages for trespass and the Appellants are perpetually restrained from continuing their acts of trespass on the said parcel of land. The Appellants’ counter claim was dismissed with a cost of N10,000.00 to the Plaintiff.

It is against this decision that the Appellants have brought this appeal. Their notice of appeal dated 4th November, 2004 and filed on the 8th of November, 2004 contains 10 grounds of appeal.

The Appellants’ amended brief of argument, which was settled by Adebayo Oyagbola Esq, of counsel to the Appellants is dated and filed on the 26th October, 2006, but deemed filed on the 9th April, 2009. At pages 2-3 of the said brief of argument, the following issues have been formulated:-

“3.01 Whether the learned trial Judge was right to have considered the case of the plaintiff, evaluated the evidence they adduced and grant them judgment before delving into a consideration of the case and evidence of the Defendant.

3.02 Whether the learned trial Judge correctly evaluated the evidence of tradition and recent acts of possession tendered by the Defendant in proof of their pleadings and case before hastily dismissing the counterclaim of the Defendants.