UHUNMWANGHO V. OKOJIE & ORS

• Pages: 326-340

326



NIGERIAN SUPREME COURT CASES

[1982] N.S.C.C.

UHUNMWANGHO Va OKOJIE & ORS.

OSAYAMDE UHUNMWANGHO



APPELLANT

V

1.

F. I. OKOJIE

2.

CHIEF JONATHAN ELEMA

3.

E. U. ESICHIE



RESPONDENTS

4.

EDDIE OYAKHILOME

SUIT NO. SC 43/1981

SUPREME COURT OF NIGERIA

SOWEMIMO,



J.S.C.

BELLO,



J.S.C.

OBASEKI,



J.S.C.

ESO,



J.S.C.

NNAMANI,



J.S.C.

17th September, 1982

Customary Land Law (Bini) - Land Tenure - Oba of Benin's approval of allocation

- Prior inspection by Plot Allocation Committee before recommendation to Oba

- Not a pre-requisite where the allotted land situated in a plot Allotment



25

Committee Layout and not in the bush.

ISSUES:

1.

Whether a party who was properly allotted land in a layout by the plot Allotment

Committee, under Benin Customary Law, can be denied a declaration of title



30

to such land.

2.

Whether the date of application for land under Benin Customary Law, is crucial

to a claim, or the date of approval of the application.

FACTS:

The plaintiffs sued the defendants in the High Court, for a declaration of title



35

to land, possession of said land, damages for trespass and a perpetual injunction

to restrain the defendants from committing further acts of trespass. The plaintiff

claimed that the land in dispute was granted to him by the Oba of Benin in 1962.

The 1st respondent claimed to have purchased said land from 2nd respondent in

1972.



40

The learned trial Judge dismissed the appellant's case, holding that he had not

established any tit

'e to the land in dispute in accordance with Benin Custom. The

appellant appealed to the Federal Court of Appeal, which also dismissed the ap-

pellants appeal, though for different reasons. Appellant further appealed to the

Supreme Court, contending that a mere error in the date when the appellant ap-



45

plied for plots, is not crucial to the determination of ownership of land under Bini

Customary Law.

HELD:

1. The land in dispute is situated in a layout. There was evidence that the land

allotted to the appellant was sure. It had not been allotted to any other person.



50

It would be a travesty of justice to deny the appellant with an approved

application verified by the testimony of the chairman of the Plot Allotment

Committee, the declaration of title he seeks.

5

10

15

20