Wahab Alamu Sapo & Anor V Alhaja Bintu Sunmonu (2010)

LAWGLOBAL HUB Lead Judgment Report

F. OGBUAGU, J.S.C.

This is an appeal against the Judgment of the Court of Appeal, Ibadan Division (hereinafter called “the court below”) delivered on 25th January, 2001 allowing the appeal of the Respondent and setting aside the judgment of the High Court of Osun State sitting at Osogbo Judicial Division (stated in the Appellant’s Brief as “decision”) per Falade, J. delivered on 16th May, 1995.

Dissatisfied with the said Judgment, the Appellants have appealed to this Court on eleven (11) grounds of appeal. They formulated four (4) issues for determination, namely,

“3.01 Whether the death of the only Respondent to the appeal before the lower court on 23/10/1999 and failure to substitute a living person in his place did not deprive the lower court the jurisdiction to entertain the appeal pending before it and thereby render the judgment delivered on 25/1/01 a nullity.

Ground 1.

3.02 Whether the action filed and the appeal prosecuted by the Respondent was properly constituted having regard to the fact that the Defendant’s family was not made a party to the suit and the appeal.

Ground 3.

3.03 Whether the court below made a correct approach to the evidence led by the parties before the trial court. Grounds 4 and 6.

3.04 Whether having regard to the pleadings and the evidence led, the judgment of the Court of Appeal made in favour of the Respondent is not against the weight of evidence as to who proved a better title to the land in dispute.

Grounds 5, 7, 8, 9, 10 and 11”.

From the above issues, I note and in fact, it is obvious that no issue has been raised, formulated or distilled from Ground 2 of the Grounds of Appeal. The consequence is now firmly settled. A ground of appeal in respect of which no issue has been formulated, is deemed to have been abandoned and such a ground, must be struck out. See the cases of Onafide v. Olaviwola (1990) 7 NWLR (Pt.161) 130; (1990) 11 SCNJ 10; Ndiwe v. Okocha (1992) 7 NWLR (Pt. 252) 129; (1992) 7 SCNJ 355-; Adomolaran v. Kupolovi (1994) 2 NWLR (Pt.325) 221 CA and Ngilari v. Mothercat Ltd. (1995) 8 NWLR (Pt. 31 1) 377 C.A. just to mention but a few. Ground 2, is accordingly struck out as urged by the Respondent.

On the part of the Respondent, three (3) issues have been formulated for determination, namely,

“1. Whether the issue of the alleged death of the Respondent was before the Court of Appeal and whether the issue is competent before this Court

2. Whether the non joinder of the Defendant/Respondent’s family was fatal to the Plaintiffs’ case
3. Whether the Court of Appeal was justified to have re-evaluated the evidence before it and came to the conclusion it did having regard to the evidence on record”

It is submitted that issue 1 above covers the first ground of appeal while Issues 2 and 3 cover the other grounds of appeal except ground 2 that has no issue raised against it and in respect of which the Court has been urged to strike it out.