OGUNBIYI V. ADEWUNMI

• Pages: 268-274

268



NIGERIAN SUPREME COURT CASES [1988] 3 N.S.C.C.

In the instant case trespass has been found proved by the plaintiffs, who are

owners of the land in dispute, against the defendant. On the available evidence repe-

tition of the trespass by the defendant was imminent. The combined effect of sec-

tion 14 of the Ogun State High Court and Order 20 Rule 2 of the Ogun State High

Court (Civil Procedure) Rules, 1977 is that the trial court in my judgment had juris-

diction to grant the equitable remedy of an injunction he granted irrespective of the

fact whether or not it was claimed by the plaintiffs.

It is for the above reasons and the fuller reasons given in the lead judgment of

my learned brother Nnamani, J.S.C., with which I entirely agree that I will dismiss the

appellant's appeal with costs as assessed in the lead judgment.

WALT, J.S.C.:

I have had the privilege of reading in advance the judgment just

delivered by my learned brother, Nnamani, J.S.C., I am in full agreement with his

reasoning and the conclusions and I will adopt the same as mine in dismissing this

appeal. I also abide by the order as to costs made in the judgment.

Appeal dismissed.

OGUNBIYI V. ADEWUNMI

OGUNBIYI

V

ADEWUNMI

SUPREME COURT OF NIGERIA

OBASEKI,



J.S.C.

KARIBI-WHYTE,



J.S.C.

KAWU,



J.S.C.

OPUTA,



J.S.C.

AGBAJE,



J.S.C.

16th December, 1988

APPELLANT

RESPONDENT

SUIT NC. SC 56/1986

Practice and Procedure - Concurrent Findings of the 2 Courts below - Attitude of the

Supreme Court.

Tort- Elements of Trespass - Concurrent possession by adverse parties - Effect of - Actions

by trespassers.

Evidence - Section 145 Evidence Act - Possession of land - Onus of proof

ISSUES:

1.

Under what circumstances would the Supreme Court, as a matter of Policy

disturb the concurrent findings of fact arrived at by the two courts below.

2.

What are the elements of an act of trespass committed upon the land in the

possession of another and whether the trespass so committed is actionable at

the instance of that person in possession.

3.

Whether there can be concurrent possession by two parties, where the two

parties are claiming adversely to one another.

4.

Whether a party to a case can successfully maintain an action in trespass where

the party has conceded that he has no title to the land in dispute.

L