In the High Court of Lagos State, the appellant was the second of the two defendants sued by the 1st to 5th respondents (as plaintiffs) and the 6th respondent was the 1st defendant. The claims of the 1st to 5th respondents (as plaintiffs) as put across in their statement of claims reads:
-
"1.
A declaration that the plaintiffs are the persons entitled to the Statutory Right of the land known and called Aiyetoro Ajah comprised in Survey Plan No. LU/LA/922/84 measuring 46.992 Hects (116.118 acres).
-
2.
Declaration setting aside the Certificate of Occupancy issued to the 2nd defendant in respect of the said land by the Lagos State Government.
-
3.
The sum of Ten Thousand Naira (N10,000.00) jointly and severally against the defendants being general damages for the destruction of plaintiff’s crops and trespass committed by the defendants on the said land.
-
4.
Perpetual injunction restraining the 2nd defendant their agents, servants, assignees or privies from continuing the said trespass on the land”.
-
The writ of summons was filed along with the statement of claim and on the same date the 1st to 5th respondents (hereinafter referred to as the plaintiffs) and an application praying for the following orders:
-
"1.
Leave to issue and serve the writ of summons and the statement of claim along with the motion on notice for INTERLOCUTORY INJUNCTON on the def
-
2.
INTERLOCUTORY INJUNCTION restraining the 2nd defendant/respondent by themselves, servants, agents, workmen and privies from further building and or constructing any structure whatsoever on the plaintiffs lands, lying, being, situate, known and called Aiyetoro Ajah in Eti - Osa Local Government Area of Lagos State comprised in Plan No. LU/LA/922/84 measuring 46.992 Hects (116.118 Acres) and from continuing the acts of trespass complained of until the determination of the suit.
-
The parties filed and exchanged copious affidavit evidence. The lower court on 30/9/93, commenced the hearing of arguments. Arguments closed on 4/11/93, and the lower court (coram Ope-Agbe J. on 17/12/93, delivered its ruling. In the said ruling, the lower court made an order restraining the defendant/respondents in the terms prayed for by the plaintiff/applicants. Dissatisfied, the 2nd defendant before the lower court has brought this appeal against the ruling.
