20/08/2020
ABDUALRAZAQ MUSA VS MAMUDA ABDULLAHI MAFIA & ANOR
suit no: CA/YL/152/2019
Areas Of Law:
Appeal, Land Law, Law Of Evidence, Practice And Procedure
Summary Of Fact:
The Appellant before the High Court of Adamawa State holden at Yola, sued the Respondents claiming title to the land in dispute.
The Appellant claimed that he bought the land in dispute from Alhaji Gidado Ibrahim who was the original grantor. Alhaji Gidado Ibrahim was allocated the land by the Adamawa State Government and he handed over the original title documents to the Appellant.
Thereafter the 1st Respondent trespassed into the land claiming ownership over same; the Appellant had to report him to the 2nd Respondent. In defence, the 1st Respondent said that he purchased the land on 27th November, 2016 from Mr. Dio D. Denis and obtained a building permit on 6th December, 2016.
After fencing the land in dispute, the Appellant approached him claiming it as his own. Dio D. Dennis confirmed that he sold the land in dispute to the 1st Respondent on 27th November, 2016.
The correct description of the land he sold to the 1st Respondent is Plot 26 ‘A’ Road with an area of about 5400 square metres which was confirmed by Thichin Akila Dwana, a litigation officer with the Ministry of Lands and Survey, Adamawa State, adding that the disputed land was on GSYP 45 Government Commercial Layout, along Yola – Numan Road, Sangere, Yola South Local Government, Adamawa State. Thichin Akila Dwana also stated that the original owner allottee of the land in dispute was Dio D.
Dennis who acquired it in 1991 from the 2nd Respondent. And that the 2nd Respondent did not issue a stop work notice to the 1st Respondent in respect of the land in dispute.
At the end of the trial, the Court below dismissed the claim of the Appellant, hence this appeal via his Notice of Appeal which has eight Grounds of Appeal.
HELD:
Application Allowed
ISSUE FOR DETERMINATION:
Ø Whether the Appellant proved his claim to the land in dispute to entitle him to the declaration and other ancillary reliefs sought.
RATIONES
DECLARATION OF TITLE TO LAND – WHETHER A PARTY SEEKING A DECLARATION OF TITLE TO LAND CAN RELY ON THE WEAKNESS OF THE DEFENCE
"In a claim for declaration of title to land as in this case, the Plaintiff must establish his claim on the strength of his own case. He cannot rely on the weakness of the defence, if any. The burden of proof on a Plaintiff in establishing his claim for declaratory relief is quite heavy in the sense that such declaratory relief is not granted even on admission by the defendant where the plaintiff fails to establish his entitlement to the declaration sought by his own evidence. See Matanmi Vs. Dada (2013) 2 SCNJ 616 at 629 – 630. The Plaintiff may however take advantage of any evidence adduced by the defence which tends to establish the Plaintiff’s title. See Oguanuhu Vs. Chiegboka (2013) 2 SCNJ 639 at 707.- PER J. S. ABIRIYI, J.C.A
PROOF OF TITLE TO LAND -WAYS OF PROVING TITLE TO LAND
"It is now firmly established that there are five ways of proving title to land. These are:
(1) By traditional evidence;
(2) By production of documents of title duly authenticated in the sense that their due ex*****on must be proved;
(3) By positive acts of ownership extending over a sufficient length of time;
(4) By acts of long possession and enjoyment of the land;
(5) By proof of possession of connected or adjacent land in circumstances rendering it probable that the owner of such connected or adjacent land, would in addition be the owner of the land in dispute.
The law is that the establishment of one of the five ways is sufficient proof of ownership. See Adesanya Vs. Aderounmu (2000) 6 SC (Pt. 11) 18, Nkwo Vs. Iboe (1998) 7 NWLR (Pt. 558) 354, Nkado Vs. Obiano (1997) 5 NWLR (Pt. 503) 31 and Ayoola Vs. Odofin (1984) 11 SC 120.
-PER J. S. ABIRIYI, J.C.A
WITNESS - WHETHER A PARTY IN A CIVIL SUIT CAN ESTABLISH HIS CLAIM ON THE EVIDENCE OF A SINGLE WITNESS
"In a civil suit a Plaintiff can establish his claim on the evidence of a single witness. See Agbi Vs. Ogbeh (2006) 11 NWLR (Pt. 990) 65. In the instant case, the appellant as pointed out earlier relied and the documents of title tendered through him and through PW 2, a staff of the Ministry of Lands and Survey. In my view, these documents established his claim to the land in dispute. He did not therefore have to call Alhaji Gidado Ibrahim who assigned the property to him. He also did not need to call Mohammed Abubakar whose land shared boundary with his own land.-PER J. S. ABIRIYI, J.C.A
Statutes Referred To:
Court of Appeal Rules, 2016
Evidence Act 2011
