BEST LAW REPORT SUBSCRIPTION PRICE!!

  • Rabiu v. T. A. Hammond Projects Ltd
  • 395
  • 2007-12-24
  • ₦ 200
  • Buy Now

Rabiu v. T. A. Hammond Projects Ltd

ALHAJI MURAINO RABIU & 10 OTHERS

V

T. A. HAMMOND PROJECTS LTD

CHIEF MUBA FABIYI

CHIEF SHITTA SUNMOLA

COURT OF APPEAL

( LAGOS DIVISION )

ISA AYO SALAMI JCA ( Presided and Read the Lead Judgment )

CLARA BATA OGUNBIYI JCA

ADZIRA GANA MSHELIA JCA

CA/L/223/97

MONDAY, 2ND JULY, 2007

COURT - Issues raised by parties - Restriction of trial court thereto Propriety of

COURT - Reliefs - Where not claimed - Grant of by court - Incompetence of


COURT - Where makes case for parties and bases its decision thereon -  Impropriety of

LAND LAW - Allotee - Meaning of

LAND LAW - Allotment of family land - Impossibility of ripening into ownership

LAND LAW - Family land - Allotee of - Rights acquired by

LAND LAW - Family land - Allotee of and customary tenants - Rights of distinguished

LAND LAW - Injunction and trespass - Claim for - Possibility of being granted where claim for declaratory relief is dismissed

LAND LAW - Tenant - Meaning of

LANDLORD AND TENANT - Tenant - Meaning of

PLEADINGS - Averments therein - Where evidence is not led in support of - Legal consequence of

PLEADINGS - Bindingness of court and parties thereby

WORDS AND PHRASES - ‘Allotee’ - Meaning of

WORDS AND PHRASES - ‘Tenant’ - Meaning of

Issues:

1.              Whether the learned trial Judge properly directed himself as to the burden of proof having regard to the nature of the issues placed before him and the claims for an order for declaration as to customary tenancy, damages for trespass and injunction.

2.              Whether the trial Judge was correct in making recommendations in this judgment when such

recommendations are not enforceable against the defendants/ respondents.

3.              Whether on the principle of ubi jus ubi remedium the trial Judge was correct in not awarding damages to the appellants against the respondents.

Facts:

The plaintiffs prayed the Lagos State High Court for a declaration that they are customary tenants on the disputed land, an order of injunction restraining the defendants from committing trespass on the land and N50,000.00 (fifty thousand naira) damages for trespass committed. They led evidence in support of their claims as customary tenants, claiming the land devolved on them through their ancestors and challenged the lease of the land to the 1st defendant.

The trial court found that they were allotees on the land and not customary tenants as claimed by them. Aggrieved, they appealed to the Court of Appeal. The defendants challenged the competence of the appeal by filing a preliminary objection, which after consideration by the court, succeeded in respect of three of the issues for determination filed by the plaintiffs which were struck out.