ADEGBOYEGA & ORS. V. IGBINOSUN & ORS.

• Pages: 13-22

ADEGBOYEGA & OR°;. V. IGBINOSUN & ORS.



13

ADEGBOYEGA & ORS. V. !GBIINOSUN 8: ORS.

5

1. PASTOR S. G. ADEGBOYEGA

(For and on behalf of the

10



Registered Trustees

of the Apostolic Church, Lagos Area)

2. PASTOR J. ADE ANJORIN

(For and on behalf of the

Registered Trustees of

15



Apostolic Church, Ilado Area)

3. PASTOR S. 0. KOMOLAFE



APPELLANTS

V

1.

PETER OTASOWIE IGBINOSUN

2.

RICHARD ENAFOGHE IZOBO

20 3. VICTOR OSAYANDE EVBUOMVVAN

4. ESTER AIMUFUA



RESPONDENTS

(Registered Trustees of the Apostolic Church,

Benin City, Mid-Western Nigeria

SUIT NO. SC 20

7

/

1

968

25 SUPREME COURT OF NIGERIA

COKER,



J.S.C.

LEWIS,



J.S.C.

MADARIKAN,



J.S.C.

10th January, 1969.

30

Land Law - Title to Land - Benin Customary Law on grants of land by Oba

must be proved in evidence as not decided by earlier cases - Trial Judge

wrong to take judicial notice of Benin Custom - Trial Judge did not determine

the real issue as to which Apostolic Church got grant from Oba.

35

ISSUES:

1.

Whether Benin Customary Law as regards the power of the Oba to grant land,

has received judicial interpretation.

2.

On whom lies the onus of proof of title, in an action for declaration of title?

40 FACTS:

The plaintiff/respondents in their Writ of Summons claimed that the property in

dispute belonged to them and thus asked the court to (1) grant them a declaration

that the property in question belonged to the Apostolic Church of Benin City; (2)

grant them possession of the property and an injunction restraining the defend-

45



ants/appellants from trespassing. The plaintiffs got judgment and the defendants

appealed.

At the Supreme Court it was :

HELD:

1. That it is settled law that except where a rule of customary law has received

50



judicial recognition such rule is treated for the purpose of proof as a matter of

fact. In this case, the Plaintiffs did not prove the Bini Customary Law as to grants

of land so as to show that they did in fact comply with that rule and that the

customary grant which they claimed was regularly made. Consequently the

Plaintiffs cannot succeed.