AGUNBIADE V. SASEGBON

• Pages: 147-150

AGUNBIADE V. SASEGBON



147

AGUNBIADE V. SASEGBON

5

SALAWU AGUNBIADE



APPELLANT

V

10 DR. A. 0. SASEGBON



RESPONDENT

SUIT NO. SC 18

4

/

6

6

SUPREME COURT OF NIGERIA

COKER,



J.S.C.

LEWIS,



J.S.C.

15



MADARIKAN,



J.S.C.

24th May, 1968.

Land Law - Declaration of title - Acts of ownership



Acts of poseesion as

exclusive owner for many years without objection.

20

Evidence- Evidence given in former proceedings - Relevance of in subsequent

proceedings - Relevance as test of admissibility.

ISSUE:

25



1. Where a claim of title to land is Lased on a purchase, and direct or documentary

evidence in support of the claim is paltry, whether sufficient and undisturbed

acts of possession can be sufficient proof.

2. What is the relevance of evidence given in former proceedings in subsequent

proceedings.

30

FACTS:

The respondent sought and go': judgment for a declaration of title to a piece of

land at Sasegbon Village

,

Tabontabon in the Agege District of Lagos State, against

the respondent.

The case for the respondent in the Court below, was that the Land in dispute is

35



a smaller portion of a larger acreage purchased by his own father, from the ap-

pellant's ancestors. The appellant on the other hand claimed that Respondent's

ancestors were only customary tenants and not owners by purchase.

As to the sale relied upon by respondent, there was little in the way of direct or

documentary evidence. Nevertheless, the trial Court found, on a preponderance

40



of evidence, that the respondents family had been doing so many acts of possess-

ion after the manner only of exclusive owners to leave room for any serious doubt

as to the verity of the claim of ownership by purchase on the part of the respond-

ent and those he represented. The Court therefore gave judgment to the respond-

ent, having also admitted en bloc, proceedings of a previous suit between the

45



parties. The appellant then appeE-tled.

HELD:

1. That even if there is litle evidence about actual sale of the land in dispute to the

respondents father in the way of direct or documentary evidence, there is a

plethora of evidence, overwhelming in their effect, of undisturbed acts of

50



possession by the respondent's family on the land in dispute, as can only be

consistent with the rights of an exclusive owner.