OBAJINMI V. A.G. (VV.N.), IN RE: OJEDELE V. A G (IN N)

• Pages: 32-35

32



NIGERIAN SUPREME COURT CASES

[1967] N.S.C.C.

OBAJINMI V. A.G. (W.N.), IN RE: OJEDELE V.

A.G. (W.N.)

KARIMU ALADE OBAJINMI



APPELLANT

V.

1.

ATTORNEY GENERAL OF

WESTERN NIGERIA

2.

LADOSU AJADI



RESPONDENT

3.

M.L. OJEDELE

In Re: M.L. OJEDELE V.

ATTORNEY-GENERAL (W.N.)

SUIT NO. SC 30

2

/

1

965

SUPREME COURT OF NIGERIA

BRETT,



J.S.C.

AJEGBO,



J.S.C.

COKER,



J.S.C.

2nd February, 1967

Land acquisition - claim for compensation - Liability in principle to pay not

denied - Payment to wrong person - Where petition of right not correct

procedure even where defendants not objecting

Civil Action - Practice and Procedure - Indemnity - Trial Judge ordering defendant

to identify co-defendant not claiming indemnity - Whether proper - Observation

on procedure for claiming indemnity - High Court Law of Western Nigeria

section 15 - High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules 0.35 r.1

Appeals - to Supreme Court (Civil) - Practice at hearing - Evidence insufficient

- Matter not properly put in issue - Further evidence patently available -

Approach on appeal.

ISSUES:

1.

Whether section 15 of the High Court Law of Western Nigeria or Order 35 Rule

1 of the High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules respectively, empower a court to

grant a remedy not claimed for or make an order not asked for, where the

person against whom the remedy or order is made has had no opportunity of

resisting it.

2.

Whether a Petition of Right is the appropriate procedure for establishing a

principal claim.

FACTS:

This was an appeal by the third defendant. Karimu Alade Obajinmi (not a party

to the appeal) brought a Petition of Right against the Attorney-General of Western

Nigeria claiming compensation of £745 for the compulsory acquisition of his fam-

ily land at Ibadan. He joined the second and third respondents as defendants, al-

leging that compensation for the land had been paid to them-who had defrauded

the government of it, he however claimed no specific remedy against them. The

Attorney-General whilst admitting payment of that amount to the third defendant