Philip Ebhota & Ors. V. Plateau Investment And Property Development Co. Ltd. (2005)

LAWGLOBAL HUB Lead Judgment Report

EJIWUNMI, J.S.C.

This action was commenced by the appellants in a representative capacity as indicated above, against the defendant now respondent, to this appeal. The following are the reliefs sought by the appellants.

“A declaration that:-

(a) The Federal Low Cost Housing Estate, Phase 1, Miango Road, Jos is the property of the Federal Government of Nigeria.

(b) By virtue of the deed of sublease dated 13/4/77 made between the plaintiffs and the defendant, the defendant as management agent for the Federal Ministry of Works and Housing cannot increase the rentage on the premises without the prior approval of the Federal Government of Nigeria, and therefore the defendant’s notice of increase in monthly rent and revocation of application forms/tenancy agreement ref. No. PHC/S/GEN/86/6 dated 28/11/89 as it pertains to the plaintiffs is null and void and of no effect whatsoever.

(c) The plaintiffs are entitled to be given first option of outright purchase of the units occupied by them respectively at the Federal Low cost Housing Estate, Phase 1, Miango Road, Jos by virtue of circular ref. No. HS/2/140 dated 9/4/76 issued by the Federal Ministry of Housing, Urban Development and Environment.

(d)An order of injunction restraining the defendant, their agent or servants howsoever from increasing the rentage on the premises or ejecting the plaintiffs therefrom except in accordance with the deed of sublease dated 13/4/77 or by due process of law.”

The case was eventually tried on the pleadings filed and exchanged between the parties. In the course of the trial, parties called witnesses in respect of what they perceived as their respective positions and each side also tendered documents, which were admitted as exhibits. At the conclusion of the hearing of the evidence and after addresses by learned counsel for the parties, the learned trial Judge in a very well considered judgment upheld the claims of the appellants.

The respondent, being dissatisfied with that judgment, appealed to the court below i.e. the Court of Appeal holden at Jos. In that court, the appellant, the respondent in this appeal succeeded. And as the respondents to that appeal were not satisfied with the judgment and orders of that court, they appealed to this court. The notice of appeal pursuant thereto, was filed by C. Ofodile Okafor, SAN, learned counsel, and who had been representing the appellants from the inception of the suit. It consists of seven grounds of appeal. They read without their particulars of errors, as follows:-

“1.The learned Justices of the Court of Appeal erred in law when they found and held:

‘On the totality of evidence before the trial court, it seems to me the issue of ownership of the estate did arise and the respondents did not discharge the onus of proof that the estate belongs to the Federal Government.

And this occasioned a miscarriage of justice.”

2. The learned Justices of the Court of Appeal erred in law when they found and held:

‘The phrase “subject to further changes in respect of the rent by the Federal Government of Nigeria” used in exhibit 1 does not seem to me to mean that the sub-lessor i.e. the appellant must seek for and obtain approval of the Government of Nigeria before it can increase the rents as it did. All it means is that any rent fixed by the sub-lessor can be changed or reviewed by the Federal Government. ‘

And this occasioned a miscarriage of justice.”