CASE TITLE: BAKO v. RABIU & ORS (2026) LPELR-82880(CA)
JUDGMENT DATE: 9TH JANUARY, 2026
PRACTICE AREA: CONVEYANCING LAW
LEAD JUDGMENT: BOLOUKUROMO MOSES UGO, J.C.A.
SUMMARY OF JUDGMENT:
INTRODUCTION:
This appeal borders on Conveyancing Law.
FACTS:
This appeal is against the judgment of the High Court of Kano State Coram Nasiru Saminu J.
This case concerns the ownership of a commercial property situate at No. 28 Ibrahim Taiwo Road, Kano, covered by Certificate of Occupancy No. LKN/COM/RC/82/464, with the relevant land file at the Kano State Ministry of Lands and Physical Planning tendered as Exhibit P1 series.
The property originally belonged to the late Alhaji Bala Rabiu, who a wealthy man with four wives and several children. He was said to have gifted properties during his lifetime to various blocks of his children.
The dispute arose as to whether the property in issue was gifted by the deceased to the 1st-3rd respondents. The 1st-3rd respondents contended that the property was gifted to them by a Deed of Gift dated 8 April 1999, duly registered and supported by a Letter of Consent. Conversely, the 4th and 5th respondents denied any gift, maintaining instead that the deceased sold the property to the 1st respondent in 2007, who subsequently sold same to the appellant, thereby making the appellant the lawful owner. The 4th and 5th respondents further alleged that the deceased renounced the purported gift upon learning of the 1st-3rd respondents’ claims, and wrote a letter to that effect.
Relying on the alleged 2007 transaction, the appellant took possession of the property, admitted to renovating portions of it, and remained in occupation, including renting and mortgaging same.
In consequence of the conflicting claims, the 1st-3rd respondents commenced an action at the High Court of Kano State on 5 December 2007, seeking declaratory reliefs nullifying the alleged sale/transactions, perpetual injunction, setting aside documents affecting the title, damages for trespass, mesne profits/loss of use, interest and costs.
The appellant filed a counterclaim, seeking declarations of title in his favour based on purchase, setting aside the Deed of Gift, perpetual injunctions restraining the respondents from asserting ownership or interfering with his possession, and damages.
At trial, the court upheld the claims of the 1st-3rd respondents except for mesne profits, and dismissed the appellant’s counterclaim. The trial court further awarded the respondents ₦50,000,000 damages (despite ₦20,000,000 being claimed) and ₦10,000,000 costs against the appellant and the 4th and 5th respondents jointly.
The Appellant in dissatisfaction, filed this appeal.
ISSUES FOR DETERMINATION:
The Court determined the appeal on the following issues:
1. Whether the deed of gift (Exhibit P.2) was competent to vest title to the property in dispute on the 1st to 3rd respondents as was found by the trial Court.
2. Whether having regard to the evidence adduced before it by 1st to 3rd respondents and appellant in support of their titles and claims to the disputed property the trial Court rightly nullified the sale of the disputed property by the 5th respondent to the appellant.
3. Whether an order of injunction can lie against a completed act.
4. Whether the 1st to 3rd respondents/plaintiffs made out a case of trespass to land against the appellants to warrant the award of damages of 50 million naira and cost of 10 million naira against the Appellant.
DECISION/HELD:
The appeal succeeded partly, parties were to bear their costs.
RATIOS:
· CASE LAW- CITING OF CASE: Duty of counsel to cite only cases relevant to the facts in issue
· CONTRACT- FRAUD: Effect of a contract or other transaction induced or tainted by fraud
· CONVEYANCY LAW- GIFT INTER-VIVOS: Whether a Deed of Gift is rendered invalid merely because it was prepared in the name of a law firm rather than by a named legal practitioner
· CONVEYANCY LAW- GIFT INTER-VIVOS: Whether a gift made inter vivos once accepted can be revoked
· EQUITABLE REMEDY- PERPETUAL INJUNCTION: When Court will grant a perpetual injunction
· EVIDENCE- PROOF OF TITLE TO LAND: Instance(s) where a party will be held to have failed to prove title to land through acts of numerous/long possession
To read the full judgment or similar judgments, subscribe to Prime or Primsol
