Quo Vadis Hotels Limited v. Commissioner of Lands (1973)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report

G. B. A. COKER, J.S.C.

The present appellants, Quo Vadis Hotels and Restaurants Ltd., were the second defendants in an action instituted by the Commissioner of Lands, Mid-Western State (now first respondent) in the High Court, Benin City. The first defendant to the action is one Chief Francis Edo-Osagie and the third defendant is the Registrar, Lands Registry, Benin. The plaintiff’s writ is endorsed as follows:-

”Plaintiff claims:-

1. A declaration that the deed of Sublease made 1st day of November, 1968 between the first and second defendants regarding No. 1A Reservation Road, Government Reservation Area Benin City and registered as No. 16 at page 16 in Volume 54 of the Lands Registry Benin City is void and of no legal effect.
2. A declaration that any purported occupation of No. 1A Reservation Road, Government Reservation Area Benin City pursuant to the said deed of Sublease of 1st November, 1968 between the 1st and 2nd defendants is unlawful.
3. Possession of the said land at No. 1A Reservation Road, Government Reservation Area Benin City.”

Pursuant to an order in that respect that parties filed their respective pleadings and the plantiff’s statement of claim avers in substance that the second defendants are aliens and are unlawfully in occupation of the premises in dispute in that the deed of sub-lease executed in their favour by the first defendant, Chief Francis Edo-Osagie, dated the 1st of November, 1968 is void. Paragraph 7 of the plaintiff’s statement of claim pleads as follows:

“7. The plaintiff will contend at the trial of this action that:

(a) The deed referred to in paragraph 5 above is void and of no effect because the transaction to which it purported to give effect was not duly approved in accordance with the provisions of the Native Lands Acquisition Law.

(b) The occupation of No. 1A Reservation Road, Government Reservation Area by the second defendant by reason of the deed referred to in paragraph 5 above is unlawful.

(c) The registration of the deed referred to in paragraph 5 above by the third defendant is irregular and bad in law.”

In the same way the first defendant Chief Francis Edo-Osagie filed his own statement of defence., In it he stated that he neither applied for nor obtained the necessary approval of the deed of sub-lease in pursuance of the provisions of the Native Lands Acquisition Law, Cap. 80 (Laws of Western Nigeria applicable in the Mid-Western State); that as soon as he became aware of this he tried unsuccessfully to discuss the situation with the second defendants and in particular, paragraphs 4 and 5 of his statement of defence read as follows:-

“4. The 1st defendant will maintain at the hearing that the 2nd defendant is in possession of the premises known as No. 1A Reservation Road, Benin City against the wishes of the 1st defendant.

5. The 1st defendant will rely on all legal and equitable defences available to him and will urge the court to exercise its powers under section 5 of the Native Lands Acquisition Law.”

The second defendants (that is the present appellants) also filed a statement of defence by which they denied that the deed of sub-lease under which they are in occupation did not receive the Governor’s approval and in paragraph 7 of their own statement of defence they plead as follows:-

“7. The 2nd defendant will contend at the trial of this action that-

(a) the deed referred to in paragraph 5 of the plaintiff’s statement of claim is valid, subsisting and current because the transaction to which it gave effect was properly and duly approved in accordance with the provisions of the Native Lands Acquisition Law;

(b) the occupation of No. 1A Reservation Road, Government Reservation Area, Benin City by the second defendants, by reason of the said deed, is lawful and proper and that the second defendants should not be disturbed from peaceful possession thereof;