BEST LAW REPORT SUBSCRIPTION PRICE!!

  • Jibrin v. Baba
  • 220
  • 2004-08-16
  • ₦ 200
  • Buy Now

Jibrin v. Baba

ALHAJI BARAU JIBRIN

V

ALHAJI BABAJI BABA

COURT OF APPEAL

( JOS DIVISION )

ALOMA M. MUKHTAR, JCA ( Presided and Read the Lead Judgment )

AMIRU SANUSI, JCA

IFEYINWA CECILIA NZEAKO, JCA

CA/J/230/2001

THURSDAY, 19TH FEBRUARY, 2004

APPEAL - Ground of appeal - Failure to raise issue thereunder - Effect

APPEAL - Issue for determination - Failure to proffer argument for - Effect - Deemed abandonment of

ESTOPPEL - Plea of res judicata - When will succeed

ESTOPPEL - Res judicata - Successful plea of - Effect

EVIDENCE - Trial Judge - Duty of to evaluate evidence, oral and documentary, and make findings of fact

COURT - Trial court - Duty of to evaluate evidence, oral and documentary and make findings of fact

LAND LAW - Land Use Act Cap. 202, 1990, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, section 21 thereof - Failure to apply for consent thereunder - Party who failed to so do raising it as a defence to invalidate the assignment of land - Impropriety of

PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE - Appeal - Ground of appeal - Failure to raise issue in respect of - Effect

PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE - Appeal - Issue for determination Failure to proffer argument for - Effect - Deemed abandonment of

PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE - Evaluation of evidence and findings of fact - Duty of trial Judge so to do whether the evidence be oral or documentary

STATUTE - Land Use Act Cap. 202, 1990, Laws of the Federation, section 21 thereof - Failure to apply for consent thereunder Party who failed to so do raising it as a defence to invalidate the assignment of land - Impropriety of

Issues:

1.              Whether the court below had jurisdiction to entertain the respondent’s claim before it as it did when the same claim was adjudicated upon by the Upper Area Court No I, Bauchi.

2.              Whether the court below was right to have interfered with the decision of the Upper Area Court I, Bauchi when the said decision of the Upper Area Court I, Bauchi was not subject of appeal before it.

3.              Whether the trial court was right when it relied on a document not pleaded by parties.

4.              Whether the court below was right to have conferred title of a piece of land covered by a customary right of occupancy on the respondent without the consent of the relevant authority.

Facts:

The plaintiff/respondent entered into a contract for the sale of the defendant’s house for the sum of N90,000.00 on the terms that the sale will be reverted if the purchase price is refunded with interest. There was also an agreement of a monthly rent of N500.00 and the certificate of occupancy was handed over to the plaintiff. A similar agreement for the sale of defendant’s farmland was also made. Both agreements were breached by the defendant, and plaintiff sought full possession of the properties which the defendant resisted. Consequently, the plaintiff sued the defendant in the Upper Area Court, Bauchi and obtained judgment. The defendant failed to comply with the judgment, and also failed to prosecute his appeal against the judgment. Thereafter, plaintiff commenced another action in the High Court claiming declaratory reliefs, possession, arrears of rent and damages for trespass. The High Court after hearing the parties entered judgment for the plaintiff. Dissatisfied, the defendant appealed, contending that the plea of res judicata operated to bar the second action.