This appeal from the decision of the Customary Court of Appeal Jos. and originating from the decision of an Areas Court brings into focus the perennial question as to the scope of section 224(1) of the 1979 Constitution as amended with respect to the proper ground of appeal from a decision of a Customary Court of Appeal of a State to the Court of Appeal.

On 24/8/92 the respondent as plaintiff sued the appellant as defendant in suit No. CV218/92 before the Grade 1 Area Court Mangu for a declaration of customary right to a piece of farmland at Rampiya in Kumbin District of Mangu Local Government Area of Plateau State. Hearing commenced on 29/4/92 before the Area Court composed of a presiding Judge and two members. The court was so constituted on three subsequent sittings on 8/5/92, 15/5/92 and 29/5/92 when the matter was adjourned to 17/6/92 for a visit to the locus in quo. On this day, that is, 17/6/92 when the land in dispute was inspected and on 24/6/92 when judgment was delivered, the court was composed of two of the three members that is the presiding Judge and one member. On each of these two days, that is, 17/6/92 and 24/6/92, the court recorded that there were three members that commenced the hearing of the case but that one member in the person of Haruna Isa had gone on transfer and that the remaining two members had continued with the case in accordance with the Quorum Direction of 1990. With the only two remaining members a presiding Judge and a member, the court delivered its judgment on 24/6/92 in favour of the respondent.

The appellant appealed to the Customary Court of Appeal, Jos. composed of two judges (Coram Gofwen and Minor, JJCCA) which on 3/12/93 dismissed the appeal. One of the issues agitated before the lower court was whether the trial Area Court was properly constituted when its membership was reduced to two. The court below in a well-written judgment decided that in the circumstances of the case the trial Area Court was duly constituted.

Aggrieved by the decision of the Customary Court of Appeal, Jos, the appellant has lodged a further appeal to this court.