LawPavilion Online


Back

SHARING CROSS EDUCATIONAL SERVICES LIMITED v. UMARU ADAMU ENTERPRISES LIMITED & ORS


In The Supreme Court of Nigeria

On Friday, the 13th day of March, 2020

SC. 790/2016


Before Their Lordships

OLABODE RHODES-VIVOUR Justice of The Supreme Court of Nigeria

MARY UKAEGO PETER-ODILI Justice of The Supreme Court of Nigeria

CHIMA CENTUS NWEZE Justice of The Supreme Court of Nigeria

AMINA ADAMU AUGIE Justice of The Supreme Court of Nigeria

EJEMBI EKO Justice of The Supreme Court of Nigeria


Between

SHARING CROSS EDUCATIONAL SERVICES LTD - Appellant(s)

AND

1. UMARU ADAMU ENTERPRISES LTD
(Suing through its Attorney, Umaru Yusuf NIG. LTD)
2. THE FEDERAL CAPITAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (F.C.D.A)
3. MINISTRY OF THE FEDERAL CAPITAL TERRITORY - Respondent(s)


Other Citations

; ;


Summary

INTRODUCTION:
This is a Ruling on an Application for leave to File Additional Evidence.

FACTS:
The 1st Respondent was the plaintiff in the suit No. FCT/HC/CV.50/2006. The suit filed at the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory Abuja was before Folasade Ojo, J. The 1st Respondent had challenged the 2nd and 3rd Respondents herein for the alleged unconstitutional revocation of its Statutory Right of Occupancy over plot No. 595 along Adetokunbo Ademola Crescent, Wuse II, Abuja granted since 1994. It had built up structures thereon and was in possession of the said plot. The said title was allegedly - revoked and the plot re-allocated to the Appellant/Applicant who, on 24th September, 2006, physically took over possession of the plot from the 1st Respondent. The 1st Respondent in the said suit claimed that the allocation of its plot to the Applicant was spurious and further that the 2nd and 3rd Respondents at the instigation of the Applicant on 24th September, 2006 sent their agents to pull down its existing structures on the land.

???The trial Court heard the suit and entered judgment for the 1st Respondent on 25th July 2009. All the reliefs sought by the 1st Respondent including a declaration that the statutory Right of Occupancy enured and subsisted in the 1st Respondent and the injunctive orders to restrain the Applicant and the 2nd and 3rd Respondent's from disputing the 1st Respondent title and/or entering the said plot were entered in favour of the 1st Respondent. The 2nd and 3rd Respondents seem to accept and succumb to the judgment of the trial Court. Subsequent to the judgment, they issued a new Certificate of Occupancy, Exhibit A1, to reinstate the old Certificate of Occupancy they had purportedly revoked, the revocation of which was one of the grievances that prompted the 1st Respondent's suit at the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory.

The Appellant's appeal at the Court of Appeal, seeking to upturn the decision of the Trial Court was dismissed; hence this further appeal to the Supreme Court. The Applicant, as the Appellant herein, filed the instant application praying for-
1. AN ORDER granting the Applicant leave to adduce or produce and rely on the document annexed to the affidavit in support of the instant application as Exhibit A1 as additional evidence at the hearing of this appeal to wit -
a. a photocopy of the Certified True copy of Certificate of Occupancy No. 1996W - 17c2 - 3d57r - 658u-60 dated 12th March, 2010; registered as No. 8324 at 8324 in volume 42 of the Certificate of Occupancy Registered in the Land Registry Office.
2. AN ORDER directing that the time for filing the Applicant's Appellant's Brief of Argument starts to run upon the hearing and determination of the instant application.


ISSUES:
The Court determined the application based on its merits.

DECISION/HELD:
In the final analysis, the Supreme Court in a majority decision, dismissed the Application. Nweze J.S.C. Dissented.


Read Full Judgment