Tourist Company Of Nigeria Limited v. Neo-vista Properties Limited & Ors (2023)

LAWGLOBAL HUB Lead Judgment Report – SUPREME COURT

MOHAMMED LAWAL GARBA, JSC (Delivering the leading judgment)

On its application, the appellant was joined as the 3rd defendant in suit No. FCT/CV/899/2002 filed by the 1st respondent against the 2nd and 3rd respondents before the FCT High Court in respect of the grant to it, of a parcel of land described as Plot 25C or 1053, Zone AO, CBD Abuja, FCT.

The 1st respondent, then known as Hydra Property Ltd, had sought for reliefs against the 2nd and 3rd respondents, as follows:-

“1. A declaration that the letter of the defendant dated 20th September, 2001 purporting to revoke the right of the plaintiff in Plot No. 1053 Zone AO, CBD Abuja is null and void and of no effect.

2. That the interest of the plaintiff is still subsisting in the land and a person with sufficient interest in same.
3. An order of the honourable court directing the defendant to issue a Certificate of Occupancy to the plaintiff immediately having paid for same since 1999.
4. An order of the honourable court restraining the defendant from granting to another person other than the plaintiff interest in plot No. 1053 Zone AO CBD Abuja and if any has been granted to any other person than the plaintiff, an order declaring such as null and void and of no effect.
5. An order of the honourable court restraining the defendant from cancelling redesigning or tampering with the said land in whatsoever manner detrimental to the interest of the plaintiff.
6. An order of the honourable court cancelling and ordering removal or demolition of any purported issuance of Certificate of Occupancy or building plans or development on the said plot in favour of any person that those of plaintiff or her agents.
7. N350 Million for unlawful encroachment to the plaintiff’s land.”

From the record of appeal at pages 173 – 189 of vol. (1), Ocean View Plaza Dev. Ltd. was also joined, on its application, to the 1st respondent’s suit as the 4th defendant.

After joining the suit, the appellant filed its amended statement of defence to the action dated 18th January, 2010 and also made counterclaims as follows:-

“i) A declaration that the 3rd defendant is the beneficial owner of Plot 25 C.B.D. Abuja covered by the Certificate of Occupancy No. FCT/ABU/MISC/1031 dated 18th October, 1990, issued to it by the Minister of the Federal Capital Territory.

ii) A declaration that the 4th defendant has no estate howsoever described in plot 25 C.B.D. covered by the Certificate of Occupancy No. FCT/ABU/MISC/1031 dated 18th October, 1990 or a purported letter dated 2nd August, 2005, over Cadastral Zone AO of Central Business District Abuja or any document howsoever described.

iii) An order of perpetual injunction restraining the plaintiff, 1st, 2nd and 4th defendants either by themselves, agents, privies or any person deriving title from them from entering or laying claim to plot 25, C.B.D. covered by the Certificate of Occupancy No. FCT/ABU/MISC/1031 dated 18th October, 1990.” (See pages 296 – 300 of vol. 1 of the record of appeal).

In the course of trial, after the conclusion of evidence, adoption of final addresses, by the parties and adjournment of the case for judgment by the trial court, the appellant filed a motion on notice on the 24th of May, 2010 by which it sought for:-

“1. An order of this honourable court striking out this suit as there is no more life issue left to be determined, the cause of action having been overtaken by events, thereby rendering the suit academic.

2. An order of this honourable court dismissing this suit as there is no more life issue left to be determined, the cause of action having been overtaken by events, thereby rendering the suit academic.

Such further order or other orders that this honourable court may deem fit to make it the circumstance.

The motion was supported by five (5) paragraphs affidavits deposed to by Tajudeen Ayemi, a Litigation Secretary in the Law Firm of Mss. J. K. Gadzama, and Partners, Counsel to the appellant and copies of the letter dated 20th September, 2001 from the 1st and 2nd respondents addressed to the 1st respondent as well as the letter dated 5th June, 2009 from the 1st respondent to the 3rd respondent, and copied to the 3rd, 2nd respondents and the appellant were annexed thereto as exhibit “A” and “B”, respectively. The motion was also supported by a written address.

The 1st respondent filed an eleven (11) paragraphs counter affidavit deposed to by Olugbenga Ogundipe; a Legal Practitioner in the chambers of the 1st respondent’s counsel, and a written address dated 17th June, 2010 to oppose the motion.