Mrs. Agatha Oyegbesan V. Dr. Olufemi Adeleke Oyegbesan (2014)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report – COURT OF APPEAL

UZO I. NDUKWE-ANYANWU, J.C.A. (Delivering the Leading Judgment)

This is an appeal against the judgment of the High Court of Lagos State delivered on 23rd of June, 2011. In it the learned trial Judge held as follows:-

(i) The court hereby makes a declaration that the Claimant is the sole owner of the Flat 1 Block 141 LSDPC Medium Cost Housing Estate Ogba Lagos State and that the Defendant has no subsisting interest in the property whatsoever.

(ii) It is also declared that the Claimant has an inextinguishable right to do whatsoever he desires do so with his property.

(iii) The Defendant is ordered to vacate the Property immediately to enable the Claimant an unfettered access to the Property.

(iv) A perpetual order of injunction is granted restraining the Defendant by herself, servant, agents or assigns from encumbering the Assigns of the Claimant.

The Defendant being dissatisfied with this judgment filed a notice on 11th of October, 2012. This notice was amended and filed on 21st of February, 2014, but deemed properly filed and served on 3rd of June, 2014.

The facts of this case is that the Appellant, as claimant in the lower Court, claimed against the Respondent as defendant in these terms:

(i) A Declaration that the Claimant is a joint owner of and has a valid and subsisting interest in the property known as and situate at Block 141, Flat 1, LSDPC Medium Cost Housing Estate, Ogba, Lagos State.

(ii) A Declaration that the Defendant is not entitled to sell, lease, transfer, alienate or otherwise deal with the property without the consent of the Claimant.

(iii) A perpetual order of injunction restraining the Defendant by himself, servants, agents or assigns from selling, leasing, transferring, alienating or dealing with the property situate at Block 141, Flat 1, LSDPC Medium Cost Housing Estate, Ogba, Lagos with the consent and approval of the Claimant.

(iv) A perpetual order of injunction restraining the Defendant by himself, servants, agents or assigns from removing or ejecting the Claimant and her children from the property.

The Appellant had sought to retain the property in issue, claiming that she was a joint owner of the property. The Defendant/Respondent put in his defence and counterclaimed that he is the owner of the property. He tendered all the documents showing how he purchased the property in issue.

At the end of the trial, the trial court found for him. The claimant was dissatisfied with the judgment, hence this appeal.