LAWANI V. ADENIYI

Pages231-234
LAWANI V. ADENIYI
231
defendant's claim to the land in dispute in the suit; and the learned Judge dismissed
the claim.
The plaintiffs have appealed, and their complaint is that on an application for
leave to withdraw, it was not right for the trial Judge to dismiss the claim with a
5
reasoning which relates to the pleadings and, therefore, to all appearance, on the
merits of the dispute. Counsel for the defendant concedes that the course taken
by the trial Judge was mistaken. All that remains, therefore, is to consider what
course we should adopt in disposing of this appeal, having regard to the circum-
stances of this case.
10
Counsel for the plaintiffs has ask€d us to remit the case for trial. Counsel for
the defendant does not agree. We are of the view that the only point that arises is
to replace the decision of the court below with what in our opinion should have
been the right decision of that court in the circumstances.
We think that the judgment of the court below should be replaced by an order
15
in these terms:-
Leave to withdraw the claim is granted with costs of suit against the plaintiffs.
We order that those costs shall be taxed in the court below on the application
of either side.
20
As to the costs of this appeal, the appellants are allowed forty-five guineas
in all.
The costs of appeal may be set off against this costs in the court below, and
if there is any balance in favour of the defendant, the plaintiffs shall not bring a
fresh suit relating to the land in dispute in the present suit before such balance
25
is paid.
The appeal from the High Court decision of 1st March, 1962, in the Benin
Suit No. W/40/56 is allowed on the above terms.
Onyeama, J.S.C.
I concur.
Ajegbo, J.S.C.
I concur.
30
Appeal allowed.
LAWANI V. ADENIYI
35
JIMO ADENIYI
APPELLANT
V
40 SALAWU LAWANI
(for himself and on behalf of
RESPONDENT
the (TIRE family)
SUIT NO. SC 139/1963
SUPREME COURT OF NIGERIA
45
BAIRAMIAN,
J.S.C.
ONYEAMA,
J.S.C.
AJEGBO,
J.S.C.
30th October, 1964
50
Land Law - Customary tenancy denied - absolute grant alleged - Long possession
-
laches and acquiescence - assignment of portions to others by defendants
-
entitled to forfeiture for such act.

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT