Oba J.O. Aina & Ors v. Chief Israel Adebayo Dada & Ors (2024)

LAWGLOBAL HUB Lead Judgment Report – SUPREME COURT

ABUBAKAR SADIQ UMAR, JSC (Delivering the leading judgment)

This is an appeal against the judgment of the Court of Appeal, Ekiti Judicial Division wherein the court affirmed the judgment of the High Court of Ekiti State which granted the 1st respondents claims against the appellants.

The appellants are dissatisfied with the judgment of the lower court and have expressed their dissatisfaction by filing a further appeal to this court against it.

Brief statement of facts

The 1st respondent commenced the action that gave rise to this appeal at the High Court of Ekiti State sitting in Ido Ekiti against the appellants and the 2nd respondent as 1st – 3rd defendants. By his further amended statement of claim dated the 21st November, 2007, the 1st respondent prayed the court as follows:

(a) A declaration that the plaintiff is a senior Chief in rank to the 1st defendant, (sic) 2nd defendant as the 4th in rank to the 1st defendant while the 2nd defendant is 5th in rank and that the defendants cannot in collusion usurp the rightful position of the plaintiff or change the order of seniority (sic) of hierarchy as contained in the Morgan Commission Report and accepted by government and which position represents (sic) and custom of Erinmope Ekiti from the immemorial.

(b) An order restraining the 1st and 3rd defendants, their agents, servants and or privies from doing any act of commission or omission to suggest that the 2nd defendant is a senior Chief to the plaintiff or at par with him in respect of his Chieftaincy of Obajemu of Erinmope Ekiti.

The appellants by their further amended statement of defence dated the 1st day of April, 2012 but filed on the 20lh April, 2012 controverted the 1st respondents pleading and resisted the aforesaid prayers therein.

The 1st respondents reply to the further amended statement of defence was filed on the 8th June, 2012. Consequent upon close of pleadings and joinder of issues on the aforementioned processes, trial commenced on the 8th July, 2013.

The 1st respondents case at the trial is that he as the title holder of Obajemu of Erinmope-Ekiti from Ijewu quarters is the 4th in rank to the 1st appellant (Obaleo, the Oba of Erinmope Ekiti) among the nine High Chiefs in Erinmope Ekiti while the 2nd appellant comes after him as the 5th in rank.

This arrangement has been in existence from time immemorial and has been religiously followed by the people of Erinmope Ekiti. The arrangement has been recognized by the government via Intelligence report exhibits P5, Western States Chieftaincy Declaration of 1957 exhibit P10 as well as Morgan Report and Government Views on it exhibit P9.

Sometimes in 1984, the 1st appellant as the king transgressed and a Panel of Enquiry was set up by the Ministry of Local Government and Chieftaincy Affairs. The deposition of the 1st appellant was recommended but due to his efforts and that of other well meaning members of the community, the 1st appellants deposition was averted. But despite his efforts, the 1st appellant still perceives him as the ringleader of those who wanted to depose him (the 1st appellant) and since then the 1st appellant had started exhibiting pathological hatred towards him and the people of his Ijewu quarters.

In furtherance of his hatred towards him, on the 7th September, 1993 during the sharing of traditional meat for the High Chiefs in Erinmope Ekiti, the 2nd appellant on the instigation of the 1st appellant got up from his seat and took the portion of the meat shared to him (the 1st respondent) as the 4th in rank in the hierarchy but he resisted the attempt by the 2nd appellant to usurp his position, he was as a result manhandled and his cloth torn. The dispute could not be resolved. In further display of hostility towards him, he said that the 1st appellant also colluded with the 2nd respondent to place the 2nd appellant above him by increasing the salary and emoluments of the 2nd appellant above his own, thereby prompting him to institute the action that led to this appeal and praying for the reliefs aforesaid.

In defence, the appellants denied all the allegations by the 1st respondent, particularly, the assertion that the 1st respondent is the 4th in rank to the Obaleao of Erinmope-Ekiti. According to the appellants, the arrangement from time immemorial has always been that the 2nd appellant is placed as the 4th while the 1st respondent is placed as the 5th in rank to the Obaleo of Erinmope Ekiti. Appellants stated that the 2nd appellants Edemorun title is the first High Chief in Erinmope Ekiti and the 1st respondents Obajemu title appeared for the first time in the Western State Chieftaincy Declarations in 1957. The 1st respondents Chieftaincy title of Obajemu is not recognized in the 1961 Chieftaincy Declarations as a Kingmaker to any High Chief while the 2nd appellant is mentioned as a kingmaker to all other High Chiefs in Erinmope Ekiti. The appellants alluded to several customary roles and practices such as Orun sisu which the holder of Edemorun Chieftaincy title performs but which the holder of Obajemu title does not perform. Further, appellants stated that the 2nd appellants Edemorun Chieftaincy title is the head of Ogbon-Arin one of the three zones in Erinmope-Ekiti but the 1st respondents Obajemu title does not head any zone. Appellants denied that the 1st appellant instigated the 2nd appellant to do anything on the 7th September, 1993. It is the appellants case that the contest for the 4th in rank between the appellants Edemorun Chieftaincy title and the 1st respondents Obajemu Chieftaincy title predated the reign of the 1st appellant as the Obaleo of Erinmope Ekiti, rather it started in 1972 when the 1st respondent attended the first meeting in the palace during the sharing of traditional meat at the palace of the then Obaleo of Erinmope Ekiti who hailed from the 1st respondents Ijewu quarters. It was the then Obaleo who ordered Chief Eisinkin to give the next portion of meat meant for Chief Agbebi the then Edemorun to the 1st respondent and upon the refusal of Chief Eisinkin to carry out the order because it was wrong and contrary to the custom, the then Obaleo ordered another chief to do his biding and it was done, that Chief Agbebi then walked out of the palace with the remark that because of his old age and infirmity he could not physically enforce his portion and that his successor in title would not brook such transgression in the future. After the trial and addresses of counsels, the trial court delivered a considered judgment on the 2nd day of December, 2014 in which it granted the 1st respondents reliefs as prayed. The appeal to the lower court against the judgment of the trial court was dismissed and appellants still dissatisfied, filed this further appeal to this court.