Disable Preloader

CaseLaw

Elema V. Akenzua (2000) CLR 11(p) (SC)

Brief

  • Customary land law
  • Burden of proof in civil cases
  • Declaration of title

Facts

The appellants, Prince Friday Elema and Prince Sunday Elema, were the defendants in this action filed at the High Court of Justice, Benin City Edo State. In the action, the respondent who was the plaintiff claimed against the defendants jointly and severally as follows: -

  • a
    "That you Emeka Ekwunugo alias Kingsley Onuorah of No.1 Inyi Street, Achara Layout, Enugu on or about the month of September 1995 at Enugu within the jurisdiction of the Honourable Court by false pretences and with intent to defraud, induced Ndukwo Ndukwo Ogbujah and Sir C.O. Ikoro to deliver to you the sum of N9,724.820 by falsely claiming that you would transfed to their account at Barclays Bank, London the sum of $108,000 (One Llundred and Eight Thousand United States Dollars) purported 10 he export proceeds of your genuine business and you thereby committed an offence contrary to Section 1(1)(b) of the Advance Fee Fraud and other Fraud Related Offences Decree No.13 of 1995 and punishable under Section 1 (3) of the same Decree."
  • b
    N1, 000.00 (One thousand Naira) damages for the trespass on the said land.
  • c
    Perpetual injunction restraining the defendants, privies, their servants and agents from further trespassing on the said land.”

The plaintiff gave evidence on her own behalf and called 6 witnesses to show that the parcel of land in question originally belonged to the late father of the defendants Chief Felix Owen Elema. At the death of Chief Felix Owen Elema the two appellants and their elder brother Jonathan Elema were given letters of administration to administer the estate of their deceased father. If was in this capacity that they transferred the land in dispute to the plaintiff as shown in the receipt Exhibit ‘D’ which was issued as far back as 2 November 1972.

It was not until 1981 that the plaintiff discovered that some people were trespassing on the land. She complained to Chief Jonathan Elema who gave her a hand-written note Exhibit ‘F’ confirming her ownership of the land in question and directing that nobody should stop her from working on the land.

For their part, the defendants denied having any land transaction with the plaintiff. They called three (3) witnesses but did themselves give evidence on their own behalf. As will be shown later in this judgment, the evidence of these witnesses did nothing to enhance the defence of the defendants.

The learned trial Judge, in a reserved judgment, delivered on 11 April 1990 entered judgment in favour of the plaintiff for all the reliefs sought. The defendants’ appeal to the Court of Appeal was dismissed. They have now further appealed to this court.

Issues

  • (i)
    Were the learned Justices right in holding the Exhibits D & F constitute...
    Read More