LawPavilion Online


Back

OSUADE ADEYINKA AKINBADE & ANOR v. AYOADE BABATUNDE & ORS

(2017) LPELR-43463(SC)

In The Supreme Court of Nigeria

On Friday, the 15th day of December, 2017

SC.11/2006


Before Their Lordships

MUSA DATTIJO MUHAMMAD Justice of The Supreme Court of Nigeria

KUDIRAT MOTONMORI OLATOKUNBO KEKERE-EKUN Justice of The Supreme Court of Nigeria

JOHN INYANG OKORO Justice of The Supreme Court of Nigeria

CHIMA CENTUS NWEZE Justice of The Supreme Court of Nigeria

EJEMBI EKO Justice of The Supreme Court of Nigeria


Between

1. OSUADE ADEYINKA AKINBADE
2. DAUDA ADEYINKA AKINBADE
(Substituted by Order of Supreme Court dated 7th July, 2008)
(For themselves and on behalf of other descendants of Akinbade Family) - Appellant(s)

AND

1. AYOADE BABATUNDE
2. LANIYI OKUNOLA
3. OYEDIRAN IGE
(For themselves and on behalf of Ogunsile & Ige)
4. DR. Y. O. ASHAMU
5. DR. M. F. PETERS
6. MISS J. O. ASHAMU
7. MISS T. E. ASHAMU
(Substituted in place of Chief E. O. Ashamu deceased)
8. DR. MAJEKODUNMI
9. GANIYU BELLO
10. OYENIKE OGUNSOLA - Respondent(s)


Other Citations

; ;


Summary

INTRODUCTION:
This appeal borders on Customary Land Law.

FACTS:
This is an appeal against the decision of the Court of Appeal, Ibadan Division.

In the case leading to this appeal, the appellants as plaintiffs sought inter alia declaratory reliefs in respect of their entitlement to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy in respect of the land in dispute and a declaration that the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd defendants being their customary tenants had forfeited their rights to remain on the land having sold the land to the 4th-7th defendants and other purchasers without their knowledge.

The respondents, by counter claim also sought declaratory reliefs seeking declarations that their sale of the land to the 4th-7th defendants was valid and lawful by virtue of inheritance being the true and natural descendants of Akinbade, the first settler on the land and in exercise of their rights of ownership.

The trial Court found the appellants entitled to the statutory right of occupancy in respect of the land in dispute, granted same and dismissed the defendants/respondents counter-claim.

Aggrieved by the trial Court's decision, the defendants/respondents appealed to the Court of Appeal. On allowing the appeal the Court of Appeal reversed the trial Court's decision, found the defendant's counter claim made out and granted same.

Being dissatisfied with the decision of the Court of Appeal, the Appellant appealed to the Supreme Court.

ISSUES:
The Supreme Court determined the appeal based  on the following issue for determination:
Whether the lower Court is right in setting aside the trial Court's finding in favour of the appellants and, instead, finding for the respondents.


DECISION/HELD:
In the final analysis, the Supreme Court found no merit in the appeal which was accordingly dismissed.


Read Full Judgment