NWAGWU & ANOR. V. OKONKWO & ORS.

• Pages: 953-960

NWAGWU & ANOR. V.

OKONKWO & ORS.



953

NWAGWU & ANOR. V. OKONKWO & ORS.

5

IHEAGUTA U. NWAGWU & ANOR

V

10 OHAZURUIKE OKONKWO & ORS

APPELLANTS

RESPONDENTS

SUIT NO. SC 133/1985

SUPREME COURT OF NIGERIA

OBASEKI,

NNAMANI,

15



UWAIS,

KAZEEM,

KAWU,

3rd July, 1987

J.S.C.

J.S.C.

J.S.C.

J. S. C.

J.S.C.

20

Appeals - Findings of fact - Two concurrent findings of fact in party's favour

will not be disturbed unless miscarriage of justice or breach of a principle of

law or procedure exists.

Contract - Illegal transaction - Court will not enforce equity of redemption where

25



the contract/transaction involves act which is contrary to the Constitution.

Land Law - Pledge of land - Land redeemable no matter how long pledgee has

been in possession.

30

ISSUES:

1.

Whether a time limit exists in which to redeem a pledge of land.

2.

Whether two concurrent findings of fact in favour of a party should be disturbed;

and when the court would do so.

FACTS:

35





The Umuagbava community in Mbaise, Imo State consists of three families.

The-appellants represent the first family, while the respondents are the descend-

ants of one K., a member of the second family. About a century ago, K's conduct

resulted in the death of a member of a neighbouring community and the deceased

relatives demanded an atonement from the three families. The first and third

40





families were to pay the equivalent of N10 each to K. as their contribution to the

compensation, but as they were unable to pay, each family gave K. a portion of

land in lieu of the amount. The appellants brought an action in the High Court

claiming

inter-alia

a declaration of title to the portion of land which their ancestors

gave to K. and an order that the respondents should accept N10 in respect of the

45





land. The trial court dismissed the claims on several grounds. The appellant's

appeal to the Court of Appeal was dismissed and they further appealed to the Su-

preme Court.

HELD:

1. The dispute was on the circumstances by which the respondents came into

50





possession of the land for such a long period of time and whether the land is

now redeemable. If the transaction between K. and the appellant's ancestors

was a pledge of land in return for a loan of money the land is redeemable

however long it may be in the possession of the pledgee. Having regard to the