Goyang Kayili V. Esly Yilbuk & Ors (2015)

LAWGLOBAL HUB Lead Judgment Report

CLARA BATA OGUNBIYI, J.S.C.

Briefly and for purpose of understanding the background history the appeal now before us, it is pertinent to state that the 1st respondent together with two other persons now deceased, whose names have been struck out of the appeal at the lower court, instituted Suit No. PLD/J.192/87 against the present appellant as well as the 2nd and 3rd respondents at the High Court Jos but was later transferred to Pankshin High Court which heard and determined the Suit. At the trial court, the 1st respondent as well as the two other persons now deceased were the Plaintiffs while the appellant and the 2nd and 3rd respondents in this court were the defendants. The suit at the trial High Court was instituted in a representative capacity on behalf of the initiators and members of Neha Family of Somji.

The case of the plaintiffs/1st respondent before the trial court was that at all material times to the action they are members of Neha family of Somji village in Kabwir District of Pankshin Local Government Area.

The Neha family is one of the two ruling houses in Somji village by virtue of which fact the plaintiffs are entitled to the throne of the village Head of Somji. On the 5th of September, 1984, the stool of the village Head of Somji became vacant on the death of the then incumbent, Nde Boyi Goshit. He was buried on the 6th of September, 1984 and there was a need to appoint a new village head of the village.

According to the plaintiffs/respondent there are two Ruling Houses in Somji village, namely Neha and Nees and the stool is rotational. The last village head, Boyi Goshit came from Nees family and it was therefore the turn of Neha family to produce a candidate to the stool.

The 1st Defendant/Appellant Goyang Kayili from Nees family was appointed by Nees family despite protest from Neha family and the 3rd defendant/respondent subsequently confirmed the appointment. The plaintiffs/respondent protested the selection of the 1st defendant/appellant as the village head of Somji by writing several letters to the 2nd and 3rd defendants/respondents. No action was taken thereon.

The 1st defendant/appellant was officially installed and presented with a letter of appointment as the village head of Somji on the 24th September, 1987. Hence, the plaintiffs/respondent instituted this action, now on appeal before us.

In paragraph 48 of the Amended Statement of Claim, the plaintiffs/respondent claimed as follows:-

“(a) A declaration that the purported election, selection or appointment and installation of the 1st defendant by 3rd defendant and the confirmation of same by the 2nd defendant, as the village head of Somji is null and void and of no effect.

(b) A declaration that the plaintiffs and Neha family is the sole house or have right to aspire to the throne of the village head Somji.

(c) A perpetual injunction restraining the 1st defendant by himself, his servants, agents and/or privies from parading himself or him and performing any duty pertaining (sic) or attaching to the office of the village head of Somji and/or holding himself or him out in any way as the village head of Somji.

(d) A perpetual injunction restraining the 2nd and 3rd defendants, their servants, agents and/or privies from holding in anyway, the 1st defendant as the village head of Somji or approving or if approved, from regarding such approval as valid, the selection, election of appointment of the 1st defendant as the village head of Somji, and from installing him or if installed, regarding as valid his installation, as village head of Somji or in any way dealing with him as the said village head of Somji.”

Pleadings were filed and exchanged. Evidence, both oral and documentary was adduced before the trial court. At the conclusion of the trial, the learned trial judge found against the plaintiffs. In its judgment delivered on the 7th July, 1993, the trial court held that Neha Ruling House of which the plaintiffs belong is one of the Ruling Houses in Somji for the purpose of the stool of village Head of Somji and that the stool rotates between the Ruling Houses; that members of Neha Ruling House cannot ascend the throne unless they pay compensation for assisting the people of Bam to kill Kankalak a past village Head of Somji.

The plaintiffs were dissatisfied with that part of the decision of the High Court Pankshin that they cannot ascend the throne of village Head of Somji though they belong to a ruling House and the stool rotates between all the Ruling Houses of Somji and appealed against the decision to the Court of Appeal Jos Division. The lower court allowed the appeal by the plaintiffs/appellant before it and held that having proved that they belong to a Ruling House in Somji and the stool of village Head of Somji is rotational, it is now the turn of their Ruling House, to exclusively occupy the stool. The 1st defendant/appellant now in turn is also dissatisfied with the decision of the Court of Appeal, hence the appeal to this court, with leave granted on the 27th February, 2007. The appellant originally filed nine grounds of appeal and one additional ground was filed with the leave of this court also granted on the 26th November, 2007 wherein the appellant was allowed to raise a fresh issue by way of ground ten as contained in the amended notice and grounds of appeal. This appeal is therefore argued on the basis of the ten grounds of appeal.