John C. Anyaduba & Anor. V. Nigerian Renowned Trading Company Ltd (1992)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report

OMO, J.S.C. 

The appellants, on record, as plaintiffs, instituted an action in the High Court of Anambra State (Onitsha Division) in 1978 claiming:-

(i) A declaration of title to the said land on the junction between Nottidge Street, Onitsha and New Market Road, Onitsha, otherwise known as No. 11 New Market Road, Onitsha.

(ii) A declaration that the receipt dated 28th day of March, 1932 was not an instrument and did not transfer title in the land to late Madam Christiana Ibiola, and therefore no legal title to her executors, administrators, legal representatives or assigns or to any person claiming through her to the Defendant.

(iii) N200,000 damages for trespass.

(iv) An Order of Injunction restraining the Defendant, its servants or agents or any other person claiming through it from further trespassing unto the said land.”

From their pleadings and evidence, the plaintiffs, both of whom were legal practitioners, are the children of late Benjamin Odiakosa Anyaduba who they claim owns the piece of land known as 11, New Market Road, Onitsha, and which is situate at the junction of Nottidge and New Market Roads, Onitsha. On or about 12/3/32 their father granted a kola-tenancy, “for her life only,” of the land in dispute to one Madam Christiana Ibiola for which she paid the sum of N120. A receipt was issued by the landlord and witnessed by one Isaac (now Chief) A. Mbanefo (then of the United Africa Company and presently the Odu of Onitsha) in respect of that transaction. A photo-copy of and the original document were later tendered in evidence as Exhibits A and A1 respectively. “On or about” 1938, Mr. B.O. Anyaduba died.

“On or about” the year 1954, Madam Ibiola, allegedly in breach of her kola tenancy, “surreptitiously” leased the property in dispute to Messrs Bata Shoe Co. Ltd. When the plaintiffs threatened her with forfeiture of the land, she apologized and begged to be allowed to remain in possession of the land “for the period of her life,” which plea was accepted by the plaintiffs. Again in 1957 she was further reprimanded “about the lease” (the reason for this is not stated) but she again pleaded for respite, undertaking that the property will revert to the children of late B.O. Anyaduba on the expiration of her current lease to Messrs Bata Shoe Co. Ltd. “On or about” the year 1968, during the Nigerian Civil War, Madam Ibiola died childless. When the lease expired on 31/12/76, the Bata Shoe Co. Ltd. gave up possession of the land to the family of late B.O. Anyaduba. The plaintiffs re-entered the land, took possession thereof and obtained an approved plan in 1977 for a building thereon. At this stage the defendant company also submitted a plan for building on the land which was refused. Claiming ownership of the land as successors-in-title to Madam Ibiola, they heaped moulded blocks on the land. Thereupon the plaintiffs took the present action against them. Soon after, on 28/3/78, the 1st plaintiff died.

The defendant, on the other hand, claims that the late B.O. Anyaduba transferred all his interest in the land in dispute to Madam Ibiola (who was also known as Madam Christiana Ibiolanigbe Oyekanmi) through Exhibit A1 under the kola tenancy land tenure of Onitsha for which she paid N120.00. By virtue of that transaction, she became the kola tenant of the Mgbelekeke family whose kola tenant late B.O. Anyaduba was. She was so recognised by that family. Between 22/8/47 and 19/5/54 Madam Ibiola executed 3 leases of the land in dispute to Bata Shoe Company, details of what are set out in their pleadings, and tendered in evidence, without any let or hindrance from anybody. She made a Will dated 16/7/55 and died, not “on or about 1968” as averred by the plaintiffs but, “on or about the 2nd September 1957”, before the Nigerian Civil War. Probate of her Last Will and Testament was granted to her Executors by the High Court of Eastern Nigeria and subsequently Letters of Administration of her estate were granted to her relations (applicants). It was these administrators who in July 1977, to the knowledge and with the prior consent of their kola landlord, the Mgbelekeke family, leased the land in dispute to the defendant company. Plaintiffs subsequent interference with the user of the land after defendant had taken possession, led to the present action.

In its judgment, after hearing evidence and counsel for the parties, the trial High Court refused to grant declaration of title to the land in dispute because, in its view, title was not in issue between the parties. Because it would work hardship on the plaintiffs it non-suited them on that claim, instead of dismissing same. On Exhibit A1 it found:

(a) that it

“was not meant to be an out and out sale of the land in dispute but was a transaction under that form of native law and custom in Onitsha known as ‘kola tenancy’. That being so, the claim of the plaintiffs that Exhibit A was not an instrument and did not transfer an absolute interest to Madam Christiana Ibiola succeeds.”

(b) that it was not meant to give a life interest only to Madam Ibiola but granted her a kola tenancy, the parameters of which type of tenancy had not been judicially resolved.

(c) that the interest transferred therein – a kola tenancy – cannot be devised by a Will, relying on the Supreme Court decision in Udensi v. Udensi (1976) 7 S.C. 1; and cannot even be inherited under an intestacy.