Whether a Piece of Evidence Previously Acceptable under the Evidence Act be Declared Inadmissible by a Bill Passed by the State House of Assembly

CASE TITLE: ADERETI & ORS v. OKE (2024) LPELR-61523(CA)
JUDGMENT DATE: 11TH JANUARY, 2024
PRACTICE AREA: LAND LAW
LEAD JUDGMENT: YUSUF ALHAJI BASHIR, J.C.A.

SUMMARY OF JUDGMENT:

INTRODUCTION:
This appeal borders on the Declaration of Title to Land.

FACTS:
This appeal is against the decision of the Osun State High Court delivered on 17th day of May, 2017

The Appellants as Plaintiffs claim against the Respondent the following reliefs:

a. Declaration that the Plaintiffs are entitled to the Statutory Right of Occupancy in respect of the parcel of land lying and situated at Awosun Village, Ife/Ilasa Express Way, Ile-Ife Osun State of Nigeria, which is delineated on the dispute survey plan No. OS/0236/DISP/2012/009 dated February 3, 2012, drawn by Surveyor Femi Falade and verged BLUE.
b. The sum of N50,000,000.00 (Fifty Million Naira only) being general damages for the trespass committed by the defendant on the land in dispute, lying and situated at Awosun Village, Ife/Ilasa Express Way, Ile-Ife, Osun State of Nigeria.
c. Perpetual injunction restraining the Defendant, his agent, servants, and/or privies from committing acts of trespass on the land in dispute.

The Respondent on the other hand, upon denying the Appellants allegation, proceeded to make the following counter-claim:

i. Declaration that only the Defendant who is now the counterclaimant, is entitled to be granted the statutory right of occupancy of the parcel of land situated, lying, and being at Tafa Jerin, otherwise referred to as Oke Awosun, Ipetumodu, Osun State, and bounded as follows:
On the first side, Sakin and Yesufu’s Cocoa Farms.
On the second side, by the Awosun Stream.
On the 3rd side, by Ife/Ibadan Old Road.
ii. Declaration that the Plaintiffs, their servants, agents, privies, and/or anybody claiming through or under them have no right to erect any wall, fence, or structure on the parcel of land described in (i) above.
iii. Sixty Million Naira Only (N60,000,000.00) General Damages for the Trespass committed on the parcel of land described in (i) above by the Plaintiffs, their Servants, Agents, and/or Privies between May and October, 2010.
iv. An order of perpetual injunction restraining the plaintiffs, their servants, agents, and/or privies from further committing any act of trespass on the parcel of land situated, lying, and being at Tafa Jerin otherwise referred to as Oke Awosun, Ipetumodu, Osun State.

After listening to evidence and considering addresses from their respective counsels, the trial court eventually dismissed the Plaintiff’s claims and then granted the Respondent’s counter-claim.
Being dissatisfied, the Appellants filed an appeal to the Court of Appeal.

ISSUES FOR DETERMINATION:
Appellant formulated the following issues:

1. Whether the trial Court was right to have held that the Respondent proved his title to the disputed land by traditional evidence.
2. Whether the trial Court was right to refuse to take judicial notice of the notorious fact of the non-existence of “Western State of Nigeria” as of 1959, when Nigeria as a country was yet to be independent, as contained in the respondent’s exhibits DA4 and DA5,.
3. Whether the trial Court was right to rely on inadmissible evidence in arriving at its decision that the Respondent had proved title to the disputed land by documentary evidence.”

The respondent formulated a lone issue viz:

“Whether the appellants have shown any perversity in the judgment of the trial Court to warrant overturning the judgment of the Trial Court”.

DECISION/HELD:
The appeal was unanimously dismissed. The judgment Hon. Justice A. A. G. Onibikun of the Osun State High Court delivered on May 17, 2017, dismissing the Appellants’ claim for declaration of title to land and granting the Respondent’s counter-claim, was affirmed.

RATIOS:

• PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – PRELIMINARY OBJECTION – Effect of failure to seek leave to move/argue a preliminary objection
• LAND LAW – TITLE TO LAND – Position of the law where there are competing claims to title to land
• ACTION – DECLARATORY RELIEF(S) – Duty on a party seeking Declaratory Relief
• APPEAL – UNAPPEALED FINDING(S)/DECISION(S) – Effect of unappealed finding(s)/decision(s) of court
• APPEAL – INTERFERENCE WITH EVALUATION OF EVIDENCE – Duty of trial judge to evaluate evidence; instances where an appellate Court will not interfere
• EVIDENCE – ADMISSIBILITY OF UNREGISTERED REGISTRABLE INSTRUMENT – Position of the law as regards the admissibility of an unregistered registrable instrument rendered inadmissible by a State law but admissible under the Evidence Act

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