J.B Atunrase & Ors. v. Federal Commissioner for Works and Housing & Ors. (1975)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report

T. O. ELIAS, C.J.N. 

In Suit No. M/186/69, the Federal Commissioner for Works and Housing took out an originating summons in the High Court of Lagos State in the following terms:
“Let all Parties attend at the High Court of Justice Lagos on Monday the 17th day of November, 1969 at 9 o’clock in the forenoon on the hearing of an application on the part of the Federal Commissioner for Works and Housing Lagos, for the determination of the following questions:

The Person or persons entitled to the Land situate at Yaba East, Lagos Mainland and described in the Government Notices Nos. 2444 and 131 dated 22nd December, 1962 and 10th January, 1964 respectively, copies whereof are attached hereto, and the amount of compensation payable therefore. ”

In the schedule attached to the summons are to be found the names of certain persons who were likely to be affected by the Government Notice of Acquisition under the Public Lands Acquisition Act (Cap.167) in respect of the land required for the service of the Federal Government. In due course, several claimants came before the court and, after considering the various Statements of Interest and the evidence led in support thereof, the learned trial judge held that compensation should be paid to the 4th, the 7th, the 9th and the 10th successful claimants. As we are concerned in this appeal only with the case of the 10th claimant, we set out the order in respect of this claimant in full:

“The Oloto Chieftaincy family will be paid compensation for any part of the land not covered by any of the Orders made in respect of the 4th, 7th and 9th claimants.”

The present appeal has been brought by the appellant asking to be substituted for the Oloto Chieftaincy family as the one entitled to the compensation ordered by the learned trial judge. The grounds of appeal are as follows:

“1. Judgment is against the weight of Evidence.
2. The learned trial judge erred in law and on the facts in holding as follows:
“On the evidence before me I am satisfied that the 1st Claimant falsely and knowingly represented to the Oloto Chieftaincy family that the land conveyed him by Exhibit C was not part of the land acquired by Exhibits U and V and described in Exhibit A. The claim fails and is dismissed.”

PARTICULARS OF MISDIRECTION
(i) The Decision is against the weight of Evidence.
(ii) There was issue raised on the pleadings to warrant any such findings.
(iii) The 10th Claimant did not show that in executing Exhibit C the Oloto acted with reasonable care.

3. The learned trial judge erred in law in failing to observe that there was no plea before him that on the date when the 10th Claimant executed the Conveyance Exhibit ‘C’ the Oloto Chieftaincy Family had no right title or interest in the land conveyed and accordingly there was no admissible evidence on the issue.

4. The learned trial judge erred in law and on the facts in failing to observe that until the issue of a Certificate of Title to the Government the legal estate (or alternatively an estate in equity) remains vested in the true owner of any Land compulsorily acquired.
5. Further and in the alternative to ground 4 the learned trial judge erred in law and on the facts in failing to observe that the conveyance Exhibit C was effectual to pass all the estate, right, title, interest, claim or demand which the Oloto Chieftaincy Family have in, to or on the property conveyed. Accordingly, the right interest or claim of the Oloto Chieftaincy Family in or to the compensation payable for compulsory acquisition of their title to the land acquired has passed to the 1st Claimant by virtue of the conveyance aforesaid.”

Later, the appellant also sought for an order of this court:

“(i) That the Grounds of Appeal be amended by adding the grounds shown in the first schedule to this motion on notice;
(ii) That the letter written by the 10th Claimant, Chief Oloto of Oto, dated 6th January, 1967, to the Permanent Secretary, Ministry of Lagos Affairs and the reply of the Director of Lands and Survey dated 20th January, may be admitted as additional evidence at the hearing of this appeal in support of the additional Grounds of Appeal; and
(iii) Such further or other orders as this Honourable Court may deem fit to make.

SCHEDULE
ADDITIONAL GROUND OF APPEAL IN THE ALTERNATIVE
The Oloto had by a letter dated 6th January, 1967, abandoned his claim to the land claimed by the 1st Claimant.”

Learned counsel for the appellant referred to a letter dated January 6, 1967, and a reply thereto, Exhibit B, and submitted that the counter affidavit of one Lasisi Salami Afisi subsequently sworn to should be ignored as it did not affect the subject-matter of the appeal, and that the counter-affidavit of the Oloto might be admitted and treated along with the appeal. It is necessary at this juncture to set out the letter of January 6, 1967, and the reply thereto as follows:
“Chief E. Jas. Ogundimu,
The Oloto of Oto,
3, Palace Road,
Oto, Lagos.
6th January, 1967.