BEST LAW REPORT SUBSCRIPTION PRICE!!

  • Moriki v. Adamu
  • 142
  • 2003-02-17
  • ₦ 200
  • Buy Now

Moriki v. Adamu

ALHAJI GARBA SHUAIBU MORIKI

V

USMAN ADAMU

COURT OF APPEAL

( KADUNA DIVISION )

ISA AYO SALAMI, JCA ( Presided )

RABIU DANLAMI MUHAMMAD, JCA

MAHMUD MOHAMMED, JCA ( Read the Lead Judgment )

CA/K/29/99

THURSDAY, 12TH JULY, 2001

APPEAL - Findings of fact by a lower court - Whether appellate court can interfere

APPEAL - Issues for determination - Failure to formulate issues from grounds of appeal - Effect of

APPEAL - Issues for determination - Meaning of

COURT - Academic and hypothetical  question - Attitude of court thereto Whether court should entertain same

COURT - Sharia Court of Appeal - Whether can entertain action involving title and possession of land

JURISDICTION - Jurisdiction of court - Main determinant - Whether plaintiff’s claim determines same

JURISDICTION - Issue of jurisdiction - Action involving title and possession of land - Whether Sharia Court of Appeal has jurisdiction over

LAND LAW - Sharia Court of Appeal - Whether can entertain action involving title and possession of land

LAND LAW - Title to land - Dismissal of plaintiff’s claim for - Whether automatically confers title on defendant

Issues:

1.            Whether section 34(1) of the High Court Law, Laws of Kano State Cap. 57 of 1983 confers jurisdiction on the High Court to apply Islamic Law.

2.            Whether if the trial court has properly appraised the evidence before it, it will still have come to the same decision and whether this failure has occasioned a miscarriage of justice.

Facts:

The appellant as the plaintiff filed an action at the Kano State High Court against the defendant/respondent claiming declaration of ownership, possession and various injunctive orders in respect of a parcel of land and the structure thereon located at Kurna Asabe Babban Layi, Kano owned and built by the plaintiff/appellant.

After the exchange of pleadings, the plaintiff/appellant testified in support of his own claims but did not call any other witness. The defendant/ respondent on the other hand testified and called two witnesses one of which is an expert in Islamic Law. A document executed by the plaintiff/appellant, witnessed by his three sons was received in evidence as exhibit D. Exhibit D is a document evidencing the donation of the property in dispute by the plaintiff/appellant to the Muslim Community at Gobirawa for ever in the name of Allah for the propagation of Islam.

At the conclusion of hearing, the learned trial Judge, Saka Yusuf, J.

dismissed the plaintiff’s claim in its entirety. Aggrieved by the said judgment, the plaintiff/appellant brought this appeal.