Disable Preloader

CaseLaw

Adomba V. Odiese (1990) CLR 1(d) (SC)

Judgement delivered on January 26th, 1990

Brief

  • Nemo debet bis vexari, si constat curiae quod sit pro una et eadem causa
  • Native court decision
  • Statement of claim
  • Questions of facts
  • Declaration of title to land
  • Finding of fact
  • Section 54 of the Evidence Act

Facts

This is an appeal against the decision of the Court of Appeal which originated from the decision of Port Harcourt High Court.

The plaintiffs, as appellants in this appeal, claimed at the trial court, that they were already, as against the 1st set of defendants, adjudged owners in possession of the "Edumato- Emeni", alias "Edumanyo" land in dispute as shown in plan no. Exh. "N" (i.e. in Oloibiri Native Court suits nos. 17/1958 (Exh. "U") and 18/1958 (Exh. "V")) in which the 2nd set of defendants "Nimbe A Location" lies. So, they are entitled to the compensation of the sum of N143,234.28 due for the acquisition of the location by the 2nd set of defendants. Furthermore, they pleaded the traditional history of the entire land verged green in Exh. "N" which, according to them was founded by their ancestor, Agbor, who was after his death succeeded by his son, Emeni, from whom the plaintiff's family took its name, and then by the plaintiffs. They further alleged that it was the same piece or parcel of land which the defendants had sued for in the High Court suit No.P/57/58 (Exhs. J, J1-J5) which action they did not prosecute and so it was struck out for want of prosecution. Also, the plaintiffs pleaded other acts of possession and ownership which they exercised over the land in dispute. These included prosecuting certain trespassing members of the defendant's community in the Magistrate Court case No. D/395C/1965 (Exh. C), in which they were all convicted and which conviction was confirmed by the High Court. Some members of the plaintiff's kin also prosecuted actions against some members of the defendant's community in Oloibiri Native Court suits Nos. 162/57, 163/57,199/57 and 201/57 over portions of the land in dispute.

At the trial court, judgment was delivered in favour of the plaintiff/appellant. The defendant/respondent then appealed to the Court of Appeal which allowed the appeal and set aside the decision of the trial court. Aggrieved by that decision, the plaintiffs as appellants further appealed to the Supreme Court.

Issues

  • 1
    as the Court of Appeal correct in dealing with the case on the footing that...
  • Read More