AMODUN A UROTI V. MADAM S. AGBEKE

• Pages: 1-13

ABIODUN AMUROTI V. MADAM S. AGBEKE



1

AMODUN A

UROTI V. MADAM S. AGBEKE

5

ABIODUN AMUROTI



APPELLANT

V.

10

MADAM S. AGBEKE



RESPONDENT

APPEAL NO. SC. 81/1988.

SUPREME COURT OF NIGERIA

OBASEKI,



J.S.C.

15



UWAIS,



J.S.C.

KAWU,



J.S.C.

BELGORE,



J.S.C.

OLATAWURA,



J.S.C.

20 7th June, 1991.

Appeals- Concurrent findings of fact by lower courts - Attitude of appellate courts thereto

- Error of lower courts Attitude of appellate courts thereto;

25

Conveyancing- Conflicting claims to the ownership of a piece of land bought from the same

vendor - Onus of proof thereof - ate .execution and genuineness of deeds of conveyance

- Onus of proof thereof - Ambiguity in the operative part of a document - Use of recitals

as aid to construction - Area Of land conveyed shown in a survey plan attached to a

conveyance - Whether enough definition of the land - Plea of non-est-facturn as a

30



defence

-

to a deed' of conveyance - Propriety of

Evidence-Conflicting claims to the ownership of land - Burden of proof - Shifting of the

evidential burden Of proof -Allegation of forgery in a civil case - Burden of proof thereof

Standard proof thereof - Presumption of due execution of a deed of conveyance under

•

35



section 149(1) of the Evidence Act - Propriety of Failure to call

a

hostile witness -

Whether fatal.

Interpretation and Construction -

Section 149(1) of the EvidenCeAct.

Land Law -

Conflicting claims to the ownership

-

of land - Trespass io land and injunction

40



- Proof of. Nemo dat quo non habet - Application of

Practice and Procedure - Use of proceedings in an abortive trial to discredit witnesses in

cross examination in another trial - Propriety of

ISSUES:

45

1. What is the attitude of an appellate court to concurrent findings of fact by lower

courts?

2. On whom lies the burden of proof where there are conflicting claims to the

ownership of a piece of land purchased from the same vendor?

50

FACTS:

The respondent sued the appellant in the lbadan Judicial Division of the Oyo

State High Court for M500 damages for trespass to a piece of land; and for an