Olalere Ige & Anor V. David Oyekunle Akoju & Ors (1994)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report

OLATAWURA, J.S.C.

The land in dispute has been claimed by both parties as being their family land. It was in 1981 that the respondent (hereinafter referred to as the Plaintiffs) took out a writ of summons against the appellants (hereafter called the defendants) after an alleged trespass by the defendants in 1980 and claimed the following reliefs:

“(a) N10,000.00 being special and general damages for trespass committed by the defendants.

(b) Injunction restraining the defendants, their servants, agents and others claiming through them from committing further trespass on the said land.”

Pleadings were ordered, filed and exchanged. Both parties relied on traditional evidence and various acts of ownership. The plaintiffs’ action was in a representative capacity while the defendants were sued personally.

The plaintiffs traced their root of title to their ancestor, one Akinfenwa Akoju, a warrior and a hunter who hailed from Oyo Ile and came to settle at Ibadan during the reign of Bashorun Oluyole of Ibadan. On his arrival at Ibadan, he settled at Ile Jegba Ayorunbo in Bere, Ibadan. Akoju settled on a large portion of land of which the land in dispute forms a part. He built a hut on the land, farmed thereon and planted palm trees, cocoa, oranges, kolanut trees and other food crops. The Plan of the entire land farmed by Akoju was tendered and marked Exhibit A. The portion of the land in dispute is within Exhibit A.

It was part of the case of the plaintiffs that the defendants’ ancestor, one Guguru was the plaintiffs’ tenant and the portion of the land granted to Guguru as a customary tenant is edged blue on Exhibit A. The immediate cause of this action was that the defendants left the area granted to their ancestor Guguru and trespassed on the area edged Yellow on Exhibit A. The plaintiffs mentioned their boundary – men who settled within the same area at the same time with their ancestors. These boundary-men were Parakoyi Alarobo, Edun Olosaoko, Oluwa and Agodi. It was part of the plaintiffs’ case that their ancestor Akoju alloted portions of his land to his junior brothers who cultivated same and planted cash and food crops thereon. Their ancestor Akoyi and successive heads of their family took possession of the land, exercised absolute right of ownership without let or hindrance from anybody.

After the death of Taiwo Guguru, the original customary tenant, his children abandoned the land granted to him. Suwebatu, Buremo and Amusa took advantage of this and they (defendants) started to sell the land granted to Guguru. The plaintiffs ejected these people and were reported to the police. The allegation of sale by the defendants was denied by the defendants who appealed to the plaintiffs to show them (i.e. the defendants) the original land granted to their ancestor as a customary tenant, and were allowed to resume possession of that portion in 1980. It was in 1981 that the defendants trespassed into other portion of the plaintiffs’ land.

In 1966, the plaintiffs were paid compensation by the Western State Government in respect of part of their land acquired for the use of the Ministry of Agriculture and Natural Resources.

The defendants on the other hand denied the claim of the plaintiffs based on traditional history and various acts of ownership. Rather it was part of their assertions that their ownership of the land in dispute was never disturbed by the plaintiffs. Their own traditional history was based on the fact that the first person to settle on the land in dispute called Aba Gururu (Guguru’s Settlement) was their ancestor Fatoyinbo Guguru who after his death was succeeded on the land by his children and grand children Fabiyi, Ereosun and Ige. Fabiyi, Ereosun and Ige were born on the land in dispute. They also built houses on the land. They mentioned their own tenants: Okunola Buraimo and Alabi Kaja. It was these two tenants that allocated a piece of land to David Akoju (lst plaintiff) for farming purposes. David Akoju later sold the land allocated to him to one TIJANI AYERETI. It was however in 1981 he came back to the land and started to sell parts of the land in dispute. Their caretaker of the land, one Alhaji Aminu reported him first to the police and later to the defendants. While acknowledging the fact of acquisition of the land by the Western State Government but asserted that the land so acquired was not part of the defendants’ land, consequently they were not in a position to know those who were paid the compensation. They finally denied trespassing into the plaintiffs’ land.

Both parties called evidence in support of their respective and conflicting claims. After a thorough and meticulous review of the evidence, consideration of the submissions made by their counsel, the learned trial Judge, Akin Oloko, J. gave judgment on 29th February, 1984 in favour of the plaintiffs. On the traditional history, the learned Judge said:

“I am satisfied that the plaintiffs have produced and I so believe, cogent traditional evidence to support their first settlement on area edged ‘Red’ in Exhibit A.”

On the various acts of ownership put forward by both parties, the learned trial Judge said:

“I am satisfied that the plaintiffs have established numerous and positive acts of ownership within living memory sufficient to establish that they are the absolute owners of the land in dispute and I so declare. The coming on the, land in dispute by the defendants around 1981 constituted a trespass and I so find.”