CASE TITLE: OTUEDON v. OFOR (2024) LPELR-62650 (SC)
JUDGMENT DATE: 12 JULY 2024
PRACTICE AREA: LAND LAW
LEAD JUDGMENT: CHIOMA EGONDU NWOSU-IHEME, J.S.C.
SUMMARY OF JUDGMENT:
INTRODUCTION:
This appeal borders on the offences of conspiracy and armed robbery.
FACTS:
This is an appeal against the judgment of the Court of Appeal sitting in Benin delivered on the 12th day of April 2019.
The Appellant claimed at the trial Court that he was the head and accredited representative of the Prince Otuedon family of Ugbolokposo Town. The Appellant’s claim against the Respondent was that sometime in November 2013, during a routine check on his family land at Ugbolokposo, he discovered that the Respondent and his workmen and privies had trespassed on a portion of his family land. All efforts to stop the Respondent and his privies from further trespassing proved abortive. He then filed a claim at the High Court of Delta State, claiming as follows:
1. A Declaration that the piece of land lying and situate along Uti Road, Ugbolokposo, close to the DSC Express Road by DPR Warri – Staff MPCS Filling Station more particularly measuring approximately 460.932 Square Meters where the Defendant built upon and Is carrying out business thereon belongs to the Prince Otuedon family of Ugbolokposo.
2. A Declaration that any conveyance, title, or interest obtained thereon by the Defendant from any person(s) whatsoever without the consent and approval of the Claimant is void ab initio amongst others.
Issues were raised, and the matter went to trial. The learned trial Judge, in a considered judgment, dismissed the case of the Appellant in favour of the Respondent.
The Appellant, dissatisfied with the judgment of the trial Court, proceeded to the Court of Appeal. The Court of Appeal affirmed the decision of the trial Court. The Appellant, dissatisfied with the judgment of the Court of Appeal, appealed to the Supreme Court.
ISSUES FOR DETERMINATION:
This appeal was determined based on a sole issue as follows:
“Whether the lower Court properly evaluated the evidence led at trial in coming to the conclusion that the Appellant failed to establish his case according to law and therefore, was not entitled to the reliefs sought.”
DECISION/HELD:
In the final analysis, the appeal was dismissed.
RATIOS:
To read the full judgment or similar judgments, subscribe to Prime or Primsol
Introduction; The judiciary holds a critical position in the democratic governance framework of any nation,…
CASE TITLE: NCS BOARD v. LAWAL (2024) LPELR-62774(CA)JUDGMENT DATE: 18TH JULY, 2024PRACTICE AREA: CIVIL PROCEDURELEAD…
CASE TITLE: KASUWAV v. NIGERIAN NAVY (2024) LPELR-62921(CA)JUDGMENT DATE: 19TH AUGUST, 2024PRACTICE AREA: CRIMINAL LAW…
CASE TITLE: EDIDIONG EYEN DEEP SEA FISHING CO-OPERTIVE INVESMENT AND CREDIT SOCIETY LTD v. MOBIL…
INTRODUCTION The new Supreme Court Rules 2024 (the “2024 Rules”) effectively repealed and replaced the…
CASE TITLE: OKORIE & ANOR v. INEC & ORS (2024) LPELR-62967(CA) JUDGMENT DATE: 9TH OCTOBER,…