Alkali Abdulkadir Jeli V. Alhaji Bello Kurmusu (2016) LLJR-CA
LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report
TUNDE OYEBANJI AWOTOYE, J.C.A.
This is the judgment in respect of the appeal filed by the appellant vide their Notice of Appeal dated 20/5/2014 against the decision of the Sharia Court of Appeal Sokoto in Suit No. SCA/SK/106/2012 delivered on 8/4/2014. It is in respect of a decision of the Lower Sharia Court Tudun Wada Sokoto delivered on 13/6/2012.
The claim of the plaintiff at the Court of first instance i.e. Lower Sharia Court, Tudun Wada Sokoto thus:
“I, Alkali Abdulkadir Jeli, Sokoto Kofar Atiku, am bringing a legal suit against Alhaji Bello Kofar Atiku the cause being that I purchased three (3) Shops from him at the cost of One Million Eight Hundred and Fifty Thousand Naira (N1, 850, 000) the shops are borders on the east with Mahrazu, on the west with Buharin Yaya; on the South with Dan Mansurah and on the North with Modibbo adama road Sokoto.”
The lower Sharia Court Tudun Wada heard the parties and dismissed the claim of the plaintiff.
The plaintiff, miffed by the said decision subsequently appealed to the Upper Sharia Court 1 Sokoto which
1
affirmed the decision of the lower Sharia Court.
The plaintiff then further appealed to the Sharia Court of Appeal Sokoto, the Court below affirmed the decision of Upper Sharia Court. The plaintiff being dissatisfied has now appealed to this Court challenging the jurisdiction of the lower Court.
The appellant’s notice of appeal is dated 20/5/2014.
With leave of Court, the appellant filed Amended Notice of Appeal on 10/11/2014.
The sole ground of appeal as per the Amended Notice of Appeal reads
“The Sharia Court of Appeal Sokoto State acted without jurisdiction when it entertained the appeal of the appellant which was heard as Suit No SCA/SK/106/2012 which relate merely to the validation of a sole agreement respecting 3 shops and a house and specific performance or enforcement of same without importing any element of Islamic Personal Law as envisaged by Section 277 of the 1999 Constitution as amended”
The record of appeal was deemed duly compiled and transmitted on 23/2/2015. The appellant’s brief of argument was filed on 25/2/2015. The brief was settled by J. C. Shaka on behalf of
2
the appellant.
Learned appellant’s counsel formulated one sole issue for determination as follows:-
“Whether the Sokoto State Sharia Court of Appeal had jurisdiction to entertain the appeal of the appellant the subject matter of which was the validation and specific performance of an agreement for the sale of 3 shops and a house.”
Learned appellant’s counsel referred to the claim at the Court of first instance. He submitted that in view of the clear provisions of Section 277 (1) & (2) of the 1999 Constitution, the lower Court lacked jurisdiction to entertain the appeal before it as it arose from a claim in respect of land without any connection with Islamic Personal Law. He relied on KORAU v. KORAU (1998) 4 NWLR (PT 545) 212 at 222; MAISHANU v. MANU (2007) 7 NWLR (PT 1032) 42.
He finally urged the Court to resolve the sole issue in favour of the appellant, and allow the appeal and direct that the appeal be transferred to Sokoto State High Court for hearing.
“The Respondent in this appeal failed to file Respondent’s brief of argument. This appeal will therefore be determined based
3
solely on the appellant’s brief of argument.
I have carefully considered the submission of learned appellant’s counsel as well as the contents of the record of appeal. I adopt the sole issue formulated by the appellant’s counsel in his brief of argument for the determination of this appeal.
Did the lower Court have jurisdiction to have entertained appeal No SCI/SK/CV/49/2012, ALKALI ABDULKADIR JELI v. ALHAJI BELLO KOFAR ATIKU ?
The provision of Section 277 of the 1999 Constitution of Federal Republic of Nigeria defines the appellate jurisdiction of the lower Court. It reads
” Section 277
1. The Sharia Court of Appeal of a state shall, in addition to such jurisdiction as may be conferred upon it by the law of the State, exercise such appellate and supervisory jurisdiction in civil proceedings involving questions of Islamic personal law which the Court is competent to decide in accordance with the provisions of Subsection (2) of this Section.
2. For the purpose of Sub section (1) of this Section, the Sharia Court of Appeal shall be competent to decide-
a) Any
4
question of Islamic personal law regarding a marriage concluded in accordance with the law, including a question relating to the validity or dissolution of such a marriage or a question that defends on such a marriage and relating to family relationship or the guardianship of an infant;
b) Where all the parties to the proceedings are Muslim, any question of Islamic personal law regarding a marriage, including the validity of dissolution of that marriage, or regarding family relationship, a foundling or the guardianship of an infant;
c) Any question of Islamic Personal Law regarding a Wakf, gift, will or succession where the endower, donor, testator or deceased person is a Muslim;
d) Any question of Islamic Personal Law regarding an infant, prodigal or person of unsound mind who is a Muslim or the maintenance or the guardianship of a Muslim who is physically or mentally infirm; or
Where all the parties to the proceedings, being Muslims, have requested the Court that hears the case in the First Instance to determine, that the case in accordance with Islamic personal law, any
5
other question.”
Section 277 of the 1999 Constitution has been subject of judicial interpretation by this Court, and Apex Court. It has been held that a Sharia Court of Appeal lacks jurisdiction to entertain appeals in respect of land matters which do not raise any question of Islamic Personal Law. See KORAU v. KORAU (supra), MAISHANU & ANOR v. MANU & ANOR (supra); MAGAJI v. MATARI (2000) 8NWLR (PT 670) 722.
In MAGAJI v. MATARI (supra) Mohammed JSC, had this to say on the jurisdiction of Sharia Court of Appeal in land matters
“Land disputes can only be pertinent for determination of Sharia Court of Appeal if it involves any question of Islamic Personal Law regarding a Wakf, gift, will or succession where the endower, donor or testator or deceased person is a Muslim.”
I shall view this appeal in the above light. Certainly the appeal before the Court below emanated from a claim for land (or interest in land) as evident from the claim of the plaintiff before the Court of first instance. There is no question of Islamic Personal Law involved in the claim of the plaintiff.
The Court below
6
evidently lacked jurisdiction to entertain appeal No. SCI/SK/CV/49/2012 ALKALI ABDULKADIR JELI v. ALHAJI BELLO KOFAR ATIKU.
I resolve the sole issue in favour of the appellant. This appeal succeeds. It is hereby allowed.
The proceedings and judgment of the lower Court decided on 8/4/2014 are hereby set aside.
I hereby transfer appeal No. SCI/SK/CV/49/2012, ALKALI ABDULKADIR JELI v. ALHAJI BELLO KOFAR ATIKU back to the appellate division of the High Court of Justice Sokoto for determination.
Other Citations: (2016)LCN/8661(CA)
