n Compulaw - 1st Indigenous Digital Law Library
Disable Preloader

CaseLaw

Rockonoh V. NITEL (2001) CLR 7(e) (SC)

Judgement delivered on July 13th, 2001

Brief

  • Fresh point on appeal
  • Special damages
  • Relevancy and admissibility
  • Registration of an instrument
  • Governors consent
  • Land Instrument registration law

Facts

The appellant company is an estate developer. The 1st and 2nd respondents are Federal Government parastatals. The appellant has as its chairman P.W. 1, Chief Christian Chukwuma Onoh. He had also in the past been the chairman of the 2nd respondent. The 1st respondent was assisted by the P.W. 1 in the negotiations to acquire a suitable site to erect its Earth Satellite Station in Enugu now named I.B.B. Third Gateway. In accordance with the agreement reached with the 2nd respondent, the owner of the site, the 1st respondent paid a premium of N220,000.00 in April, 1983 for the site and was thereafter to pay an annual rent of N100.00. The site in question and was known as No. 13 Colliery Avenue, Enugu. The 1st respondent has since erected its satellite station which has been in operation. Somehow, as will be clear later, the appellant, through active voice and involvement of P.W.1, claimed to have become the owner of the site in reliance on a deed of assignment which will be more particularly referred to and considered in the course of this judgment. Eventually, sometime in February, 1993, P.W. 1 commissioned Estate Surveyors and Valuers known as Chinwuba, Odumodu & Co. 8 Chime Avenue, New Haven, Enugu to carry out a valuation of the site. This was with a view to determining the money worth of the site in order to make a claim against the 1st respondent.

At the time of acquisition of the site by the 1st respondent, there were existing buildings of the 2nd respondent thereon. This fact is supported by a body of documentary and oral evidence. It is sufficient for the present purpose to start by referring to part of the evidence given by p.w.4, Alpha Ifeanacho Odumodu, an estate surveyor/valuer called as a witness by the appellant and to extracts from the document prepared by him, exhibit V. The said oral evidence and the document speak volumes. The witness said:

  • “The plaintiff’s (sic) company engaged my services to carry out the valuation of a property at 13 Colliery Avenue, G.R.A., Enugu. My company carried out the assignment. I visited the site in order to confirm what is in the report. My company visited the site and prior to our visit the property had been demolished. The plaintiffs informed us that there is similar property along Colliery Avenue and my company also saw that one. We visited the property closest to the one we were supposed to value ……………. In carrying out the valuation, we ascertained that an offer of 2.37 million naira was made on the property in 1982. We based our valuation on the offer in 1982 by determining the amount to which the figure 2.37 million naira was if invested in a Bank in 1982 would amount to now, at the existing bank rate which is 27% interest rate from Commercial Banks. After this, our valuation gave us N32,854,125.00. Property values since 1982 have been on the increase. We used the multiplier of 13.8625 derived from our valuation table based on the interest rate of 27% 13.8625 was got from valuation table that guides us.”

    • The Valuation Report dated 11 February, 1993 was tendered by p.w.4 and admitted by the court as exhibit V which was a Valuation Report on purely investment portfolio in a commercial bank which valued the property at N32,854,125.00.

    The facts in brief, are as follows: the land in dispute formerly formed part of the land owned by one Aige, a Yoruba man and native of or an indigene of Ikorodu, Lagos State under customary law or native law and custom. On his death intestate, the property devolved on his children as family property. At some time later, the family decided to partition the family property at Aige family and allotted the land in dispute to one of the descendants of Aige by name Chief T.K. Dada. After his death, the family conveyed by deed of grant the said parcel of land to:

    Defendant stated further that at a point in time, the Plot Allotment Committee in the area tried to encroach on his land so he went before the Oba and made a report. That the Oba called up the Ogidas to the Palace and when the matter was looked into, the Oba decided in his favour. He tendered a written decision of the Oba as Exhibit 'H'. He later obtained a Deed of Conveyance, Exhibit 'E' registered as No.14 at page 14 in Volume 15 of the Lands Registry in the Office at Benin City.

    Appellants brought this action in April 1992 against the 1st respondent and claimed originally in the writ for 5,000,000.00 damages for trespass and an injunction. The 2nd respondent was later joined as co-defendant on the application of the 1st respondent. In spite of the joinder, the appellant in its amended statement of claim made it clear that the reliefs sought were against the 1st respondent only. He finally claimed for N32,752,506 to general damages for trespass to 13 Colliery Avenue and an injunction.

    The trial Judge gave judgment in favour of the appellant.

    The appeal was allowed and judgment of the trial court was set aside and an order dismissing the appeal was made.

    Appellant, dissatisfied appealed to the Supreme Court.

Issues

  • 1
    Whether in view of the numerous defects of exhibit J the appellant could...

Read More