Sunday Adisa Oduntan Vs General Oil Ltd. (1995)

LAWGLOBAL HUB Lead Judgment Report

OGWUEGBU, J.S.C. 

The plaintiff in the application for interlocutory injunction which led to this appeal brought an action against the defendant in the Lagos High Court claiming the following reliefs:-

(a) A declaration that the plaintiff is entitled to quiet possession and enjoyment of the land situate, lying and being at Onisigidi village near Agege along Lagos-Abeokuta Express-Way in Ikeja Division of Lagos State which is more particularly described and delineated on the Plan No. RO/LA 750 dated 27th March, 1973 for a period of 50 years commencing from 30th June, 1983 under a valid and enforceable contract between the plaintiff and the defendant.

(b) A declaration that the defendant is not entitled in law to terminate the said contract before the due date.

(c) An order of perpetual injunction restraining the defendant by himself, his servants, workmen, privies or agents or otherwise howsoever from trespassing on the said land or disturbing or otherwise interfering with the plaintiff’s quiet enjoyment thereof or from carrying on the business of purchasing, storing or selling petroleum products thereon without the authority and consent of the plaintiff.”

The plaintiff later filed a motion on notice for an order of interlocutory injunction restraining the defendant from trespassing or otherwise interfering with the plaintiff’s quiet enjoyment of the land or from carrying on the business of purchasing, storing or selling petroleum products thereon. The application was granted. The defendant appealed against the ruling and having lost the appeal in the court below, has further appealed to this court.

From the four grounds of appeal filed, he formulated eight issues for determination. In effect two issues were formulated from one ground of appeal. Issues 2, 4, 6 and 7 are based on complaints against the decision of the learned trial Judge. By formulating those issues the learned counsel for the appellant appeared to have forgotten that this is an appeal against the decision of the Court of Appeal. Since issues 1,3,5 and 8 will dispose of the appeal, I will therefore confine myself to those issues which rightly complain against the decision of the court below. Issues 2,4, 6 and 7 are incompetent and are hereby struck out. The respondent on the other hand did not file any brief of argument. He was neither present at the hearing nor represented by counsel.

The facts giving rise to this application can be summarised as follows: The plaintiff and the defendant entered into an agreement whereby the defendant leased a parcel of land at Onisigidi Village near Agege along Lagos-Abeokuta Expressway in Ikeja to the plaintiff for a period of fifty years commencing from 30th June, 1983 at a yearly rent of N2,500.00. The defendant let the plaintiff into possession of the land upon receipt by him of the sum of N25,000.00 being rent for the first ten years of the lease granted. The plaintiff paid another sum of N50,000.00 to the defendant for construction works already executed on the land by the defendant. The plaintiff erected a petrol service station on the land with his own money.

The plaintiff agreed with the defendant to appoint the defendant the operator of the Petrol Service Station and for the defendant to manage the same as a dealer. The defendant paid the sum of N50,000.00 which the plaintiff paid into the defendant’s Dealership Deposit Account for the supply of petroleum products.

The defendant through his solicitors wrote to the plaintiff determining the said dealership agreement on 15/4/87 and asked the plaintiff to remove its signs and pumps lawfully placed on the land including the plaintiff’s other machinery and equipment thereon.

The defendant in his counter-affidavit deposed that sometime in 1983, he rented the petrol station to the plaintiff at a yearly rent of N2,500.00 and that the plaintiff paid the sum of N25,000.00 as rent for ten years; that he has been in possession of the property selling petroleum products from the plaintiff on an owner/dealer basis.

He further averred that all that the plaintiff contributed were logo, pumps and underground tank; that there was irregular supply of petroleum products by the plaintiff and this adversely affected his business. As there was no improvement in the supply, he instructed his solicitors to write a letter of protest. When there was no improvement in the supply of petroleum products, he procured a license from Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC.) for storage and sale of petroleum products through National Oil and Chemical Marketing Company Ltd.

Before he started receiving supplies from the National Oil and Chemical Marketing Co. Ltd., he instructed his solicitors to write to the plaintiff terminating the dealership agreement and forwarded a certified cheque for the sum of N 15,000.00 being the unused rent paid by the plaintiff. The solicitors carried out the instructions.

He deposed that he had been receiving constant and regular supply of petroleum products from the National Oil and Chemical Marketing Co. Ltd. since 27/4/87 and 12/5/87, the plaintiff and his agents took over the running of the petrol station and started selling the petroleum products purchased from the National Oil and Chemical Marketing Co. Ltd.