SIWONIKU V. ODUFUWA

• Pages: 190-193

190



NIGERIAN SUPREME COURT CASES

[1969] N.S.C.C.

to establish such possession as should oust the title of the original owner. In our

view, the occurrence of several legal proceedings since 1912 must indicate that if

the family of Disu Orisan was ever in possession, that possession was not undis-

turbed, and complete unacceptance of the purported sale to Disu Orisan (which

we have held was void and not just voidable) is singular evidence of the mainten-



5

ance of the rights of the Alago-Asalu family over the land. That being the case, it

seems to us that the learned trial Judge was clearly in error when he held that the

Disu Orisan family were in undisturbed possession of the land since the void sale

of 1909.

For the above reasons, we have come to the conclusion that this appeal must



10

succeed on the grounds of appeal argued. We accordingly order that:-

(a)

the appeal be allowed and the judgment of Ikpeazu,J., in Suit No. LD/229/61,

including the order as to costs be set aside;

(b)

the appellant be declared the owner of all that piece of land situate at 'tire,



15

Surulere, Lagos, and verged red on plan No. K. 2333 of 16th February, 1965

(exh.R);

(c)

the first respondent (A.J. Atunrase) and/or his servants of agents be re-

strained from dealing with the said land; and

(c1) the respondents pay the costs of this appeal assessed in this Court at 92



20

guineas and h the court below at 88 guineas.

Appeal allowed.

25

SIWONIKU V. ODUFUWA

GABRIEL SIWONIKU



APPELLANT



30

V

ZACCEUS ODUFUWA

(On behalf of himself and



RESPONDENT

members of the Eternal

Sacred Order of the



35

Cherubim and Seraphim, Ososa)

SUIT NO. SC 511/1966

SUPREME COURT OF NIGERIA

ADEMOLA,



C.J.N.

LEWIS,



J.S.C.



40

MADARIKAN,



J.S.C.

25th April, 1969.

Courts - Customary Court - Jurisdiction - Burden of proof on party who asserts

jurisdiction - Customary Court Law W.N. ss.19, 20.



45

ISSUE:

1. When the jurisdiction of a court is in issue, on whom rests the onus of proving

that the court has jurisdiction?

FACTS:



50

The plaintiff's claim was for a declaration that the defendant had broken away

from the church and as seceders were not entitled to use the church for any pur-

pose. In the Customary Court the case was struck out as the Judge held that his

court had no jurisdiction to try the case as a company incorporated under the Com-