Mrs. Oyindamola Kasunmu & Ors V. Prince David Akintola Adepegba (2010)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report – COURT OF APPEAL

HON. JUSTICE MONICA. B. DONGBAN-MENSEM J.C.A. (Delivering the Leading Judgment)

This appeal challenges the decision of the High Court of Lagos Coram Oduneye J. delivered on the 6th June, 2003. The Judgment is reproduced at pages 125-138 of the Record for this appeal.

The Respondent, who was the Plaintiff, and shall hereafter be referred to as the Respondent, commenced the suit by a writ of summons. The writ which was dated 5th August, 1998 sought the following reliefs:

(1) The Plaintiffs’ claim jointly and severally is for a Declaration that the Plaintiffs are the persons jointly and severally entitled to the grant of Statutory Right of Occupancy in respect of that parcel of land situate, lying and being at Ajegunle Ilo, Ajegunle Village along Abeokuta Express Road, Lagos, which said parcel of land is part of a larger area of land on a plan attached to a Deed of conveyance dated 17th day of June, 1915 and registered as No. 127 at page 418 in volume 90 of the Register of Deeds kept at the Lands Registry in Lagos.

(2) The sum of N200, 000. 00 being special and general damages as well for the destruction of the Plaintiffs’ cash crops by the defendant and or his agents servants or privies.

The particulars of special damages were endorsed as follows:

(1) Cash Crops Destroyed:

(a) 2000 Cassava Rubbers @ N10 each – N20,000.00

(b) 500 Banana Trees @ N50 each – N25, 000.00

(c) 500 Pawpaw Trees @ N50 each – N25.00000

(2) General Damages – N130,000.00

TOTAL – N200,000.00.

(3) Perpetual Injunction restraining the Defendant by himself privies, servants and/or agents and any other person or body claiming through him from further committing further acts of trespass on the said land.

The parties filed and exchanged pleadings, the matter proceeded to hearing on a rather slow motion punctuated with numerous and endless applications made by the Appellants. Page 2 of Appellant’s brief gives a history of the case and all the change of Counsel made. The numerous applications and change of Counsel give clear impression that the Appellants were not desirous of seeing the conclusion of the matter within a reasonable time.