Isaac Talabi Ogunbambi V. Adeni Ji Soyonbo Abowab (1951)

LawGlobal Hub Judgment Report – West African Court of Appeal

Action for trespass—Burden of proof—Unregistered instrument not admissible to prove title—Such instrument admissible to prove payment of money and coupled with possession gives rise to an equitable interest—Notice of equitable interest presumed where culpable negligence established—Independent proof of sale by Native Law and Custom.

Facts

The plaintiff was awarded damages for trespass to land in an action where an issue of title was raised. The Court accepted the finding of the trial Court that the plaintiff was in possession. The onus, therefore, lay on the defendant to prove a better title. Both parties traced their claim to title through the Oloto family, the original owners of the land. The plaintiff claimed by virtue of direct purchase from the Oloto family in 1929 by his predecessor in title.

The defendant finally relied on a conveyance by the Oloto family in 1948.
Counsel claimed that defendant’s title was better than the plaintiff’s and challenged the admissibility of a ” purchase receipt ” as any proof of title on the grounds that it was an instrument within the meaning of section 2 of the Land Registration Ordinance (Cap. 108), and had not been registered. He also argued that even if plaint’ff had any equitable interest the defendant had no notice of such interest and was not affected thereby. The Court also considered whether there was not a valid sale to the plaintiff by native law and custom.

Held

The purchase receipt, being an unregistered instrument, was not admissible to prove title, but was admissible as an acknowledgment of the payment of money and coupled with the plaintiff being in possession, raised a presumption that he entered into possession under a contract of sale, and from this arose .an equitable interest capable of being converted into a legal estate by specific performance. The defendant could have acquired knowledge of this equitable interest but for his gross or culpable negligence, and must therefore be presumed to have had notice of the plaintiff’s equitable interest.

Held also, that the land was held by the Oloto family by native law and custom, and thereunder no such things as written contracts or conveyances are necessary to effect a valid sale. The payment of the purchase money and the delivery of possession to the plaintiff created a valid title by native law and custom.

Appeal dismissed.