CaseLaw
Usman V. Garki (2003) CLR 7(d) (SC)
Judgement delivered on July 4th 2003
Brief
Facts
It is clear from the pleadings and the evidence led that the Respondent who initiated the action claimed that in 1988, he applied to the Land and Survey Department, Jalingo for the allocation to him of the plot in dispute. The application which was granted was conveyed to him by a letter, Ref. No. GS/MLS/LAN/13060/1 of 18/5/90 (Ex.MB1). Thereafter, he deposited on the plot eight tipper trips of sharp S.A.N.d from which he moulded 2,500 blocks preparatory to developing the plot. He afterwards submitted a building plan of his proposed building to the Taraba State Urban Planning Authority. Following the inspection of the plot, the Authority drew the site plan of the disputed land. Subsequently, the Authority approved the building plan Ex. MB2; and was also given approved building permit, Ex.MB3 later, he was given a Certificate of Occupancy No.03/10097 dated 29/9/93 which was admitted as Ex.MB4. During one of the visits to the site by the Respondent, he noticed that somebody had entered his land. His enquiries then led him to the Appellant. As it was impossible to reach an accord with the Appellant through the intervention of his parents and mutual friends, the Respondent commenced this action by a writ of summons on the 19th of August 1993.
The Appellant, on the other hand, claimed that he bought the land in dispute in 1981 from one Ali Abubakar Gadal for the sum of N1,700.00. This transaction was reduced into writing and was dated 22/9/81. It was rejected during the trial, though, as it was not registered. As his vendor Ali Abubakar claimed that he derived title to the land from the Jalingo Local Government, the Appellant applied for and was issued with a Certificate of Occupancy No.20 of 29/6/82, Exhibit MB5 by the Jalingo Local Government. The Appellant also claimed that he deposited 150 trips of sharp sand on the disputed land, and that the Respondent allegedly moulded 2,500 cement blocks from the sharp Sand
At the trial, the parties gave evidence in support of their respective cases. The trial Court upheld the claims of the Respondent that included the award of N3,000.00 damages for trespass and an order of perpetual injunction against the Appellant. The trial Court dismissed the counter-claims of the Appellant. The appeal to the Court below by the Appellant was also dismissed. As he was still dissatisfied with the judgment and orders of that Court, he has appealed further to the Supreme Court.