Order of Priority Where Two Contending Parties Lay Claim to a Land Allegedly Allocated to Them by a Common Grantor

CASE TITLE: EDOH v. OMOROGIEVA & ANOR (2025) LPELR-80012(CA)

JUDGMENT DATE: 21^ST JANUARY, 2025

PRACTICE AREA: LAND LAW

LEAD JUDGMENT: MUHAMMAD IBRAHIM SIRAJO, J.C.A.

SUMMARY OF JUDGMENT:

INTRODUCTION:

This appeal borders on Land Law.

FACTS:

This appeal is against the judgment of the High Court of Edo State, Benin Judicial Division delivered by N.A. Imoukhuede, J. on 22nd June, 2017.

The appellant by a writ of summons filed at the trial Court), the appellant, claimed against the 1st respondent, declaration of title to a parcel of land measuring 100ft by 100ft feet situated at Uteh Village Area, Benin City. She also claimed damages for trespass and perpetual injunction. The action was given Suit No. B/191/2006.

Before the close of pleadings in that case, the 1st respondent also instituted another action before the same trial Court against the appellant, claiming declaration of title, damages, and an injunction over a piece of land measuring 100ft by 100ft feet situated at Uteh Village Area, Benin City. That action was registered as Suit No. B/224/2006. The 2nd respondent, was later joined as 2nd defendant on the application of the 1st respondent. By an order of the trial Court both suit Nos. B/191/2006 and B/224/2006 were consolidated and heard together.

​Parties filed and exchanged their respective pleadings in the suits, and upon the conclusion of the trial, judgments in the two suits were delivered. In respect of Suit No. B/224/2006, which is the subject of the instant appeal, judgment was delivered in favor of the plaintiff, now 1st respondent, against the appellant and the 2nd respondent. The 2nd respondent did not file any pleading in defence of the suit at the trial Court.

Being dissatisfied with the judgment of the trial, the appellant appealed against the same in the instant appeal.

ISSUES FOR DETERMINATION:

The Court adopted the two issues formulated by the appellant in the determination of the appeal:

(i) Whether the learned trial Judge was right in entering judgment for the claimant when he did not plead and lead evidence of Benin customary law on land acquisition and the identity of the land granted his predecessor-in-title in accordance with Benin Customary Law?

(ii). Whether the learned trial Judge did not err in law in delving into the process Appellant’s Oba’s approval went through when it was not an issue before the Court in the trial?

DECISION/HELD:

In conclusion, the appeal was dismissed.

RATIOS:

• COURT- RAISING ISSUE(S) SUO MOTU: What raising issue(s) suo motu implies
• COURT- RAISING ISSUE(S) SUO MOTU: Instance when a Court cannot be accused of raising issue suo motu
• CUSTOMARY LAW- BENIN CUSTOMARY LAW: Procedure for acquisition of title to land under Bini customary law
• CUSTOMARY LAW- BENIN CUSTOMARY LAW: Effect of the approval of the Oba of Benin on transfer of title to land in Benin
• EQUITY- ORDER OF PRIORITY IN EQUITY: Order of priority where two contending parties lay claim to a land allegedly allocated to them by a common grantor
• LAND LAW- IDENTITY OF LAND: Duty of a plaintiff/claimant to establish the identity/area of land in dispute
• LAND LAW- IDENTITY OF LAND: Effect of failure to prove identity of land

To read the full judgment or similar judgments, subscribe to Prime or Primsol