n Compulaw - 1st Indigenous Digital Law Library
Disable Preloader

CaseLaw

Sowunmi V. Ayinde (2010) CLR 6(o) (CA)

Judgement delivered on June 10th 2010

Brief

  • Fresh issue on appeal
  • Issues for determination
  • Family land
  • Partition of land
  • Family land under Yoruba native law and custom
  • Amendment of pleadings

Facts

This is an appeal against the judgment of the High Court of Ogun State, Ota judicial division delivered on 27/9/2000. By a writ of summons and statement of claim both dated 1/9/95, the plaintiff (now deceased and represented by the respondents herein) sought the following reliefs against the appellants (as defendants):

  • 1
    ."A declaration: -
    • i
      That the piece of land situate at Abule Ojo Sunmonu, Iju, Akute in Ifo/Ota Local Government Area of Ogun State covered by survey plan No. MAF/71 A & B/89L of 27th November 1989 is a family land.
    • ii
      That the said land belongs to and is known as Sowunmi family land under Yoruba Native Law and Custom and the plaintiff is now head and principal member of the family.
    • iii
      That the 2nd and 3rd defendants are not members of Sowunmi family.
    • iv
      That being a most Junior member of the Sowunmi Family, the first defendant's purported dealing with Sowunmi Family land without the consent of the plaintiff and Pa H. A. Sowunmi (deceased) as head and principal member of Sowunmi family is null, void and of no effect.
    • v
      That the purported acquisition and/or dealing by defendants with portions of Sowunmi family land is null, void and of no effect whatsoever.
    • Order: 2.

    • 2
      • i
        Setting aside any purported dealings with the Sowunmi family land by the defendants whether by themselves, agents and/or servants and privies.
      • ii
        The sum of N500, 000.00 damages for trespass on the said land committed by the defendants, their agents and/or servants and privies.
      • 3
        Perpetual injunction restraining the defendants whether by themselves, agents, servants and/or privies from committing further acts of trespass on the said land."

Pleadings were filed and exchanged. At the trial the plaintiff testified on his own behalf and called one witness. The 1st defendant testified on his own behalf and called four other witnesses. Both parties tendered exhibits.

It was the case of the plaintiff at the trial court that the land in dispute situate at Abule Ojo Sunmonu, Iju Akute in Ifo/Ota Local Government Area Ogun State, more particularly delineated on survey plan no. MAF/71 A & B/89L of 27th November, 1989 is Sowunmi family land and has never been partitioned. He testified that Pa Orojobi Sowunmi their ancestor begat Hezekiah Salako Sowunmi. Hezekiah Salako Sowunmi had five children. Three died without issue. The two surviving children were Emmanuel Ayodele Sowunmi and Jacob Folarin Sowunmi and they constituted the two surviving branches of the family. Emmanuel Ayodele Sowunmi had three children, namely H. Adeniji Sowunmi, E. Oladipo Sowunmi (the plaintiff/respondent), and Iyabo Sowunmi. Jacob Folarin Sowunmi had two children, M. Babatunde Sowunmi and Bode Sowunmi (the 1st defendant/ 1st appellant). Jacob Folarin Sowunmi became head of the family after the death of Emmanuel Ayodele Sowunmi. He remained head of the family until his death in 1981. At the time the suit was instituted the plaintiff was the oldest living member of the family.

It was the contention of the plaintiff that the 1st and 3rd defendants purported to sell plots of land to the 4th - 16th defendants without the authority of the family. The 3rd defendant is the wife of late M. Babatunde Sowunmi. The plaintiff contended that the purported sales were null and void and that all the defendants were trespassers.

It was the case of the defendants (now appellants) that Jacob Folarin Sowunmi partitioned the family land in 1973 when he was head of the family. That the 2nd defendant, at the family's request, secured the services of a surveyor to survey the land after the partition. That when the family was unable to pay the N6, 500.00 charged for the survey, the 2nd defendant had to pay the surveyor out of his own pocket. It was the defendants' case that in return for the surveyor's fees paid by the 2nd defendant, the family gave him a portion of the partitioned land. The plaintiff however maintained that the land was never partitioned and that the family did not instruct a surveyor to conduct a survey thereon in 1973.

At the conclusion of the trial and after the addresses of learned counsel, the learned trial Judge in a considered judgment found in favour of the plaintiff and granted all but one of his reliefs.

The appellants were dissatisfied with the decision.

Issues

  • 1
    Whether or not the trial court acted judicially and judiciously when it...
Read More