Duty of a claimant/plaintiff in an action for declaration of title to land #
AFATAKPA v. FEJOKWU & ANOR (2021) LPELR-56697(CA) #
“In addition, the parameter for determination in a relief of a declaration of title to land there is a duty on the claimant to prove certain facts without which the action would fail. In ABIDAN SAMUEL v YAHAYA WAZIRI & ORS (2016) LPELR -40313 (CA) the Court held thus; “Therefore in an action for declaration of title to land, what the claimant was required to prove in order to succeed, are: 1. To ascertain the identity of the land to which his claim relates and prove it,2. Second, He must plead and establish the root of his title. As regards the issues of the proof of the identity of the land in question, the Apex Court in Dada V. Dosunmu (2006) 18 NWLR (Pt. 1010) 134 held that: “The plaintiff must first and foremost plead and prove clearly the area of the land to which his claim relates and boundaries thereof and if the location and size of the land is in issue, the Plaintiff must prove the exact location and the area being claimed…” The Supreme Court also held in Gbadamosi V. Dairo (2007) 3 NWLR (Pt. 1025) 282, 300 that: “The issue of the identity of the land in an action for declaration of title to land is very fundamental. The onus is on the Plaintiff seeking the declaration to establish the precise identity of the land he is seeking the declaration. See for example Ezukwu Vs. Ukachukwu (2004) 17 NWLR (Pt. 009) 227; Iordye V. Ihyambe (2000) 15 NWLR (Pt. 692) 675. But where the area of land in dispute is well known to the parties, the question of proof of the identity of the land does not arise. In such a situation it cannot be contended that the area claimed of the land in dispute is certain. See Akinterinwa V. Oladunjoye (2000) 6 NWLR (Pt. 659) 92. It must be emphasized in an action where the Plaintiff claims a declaration of title to land and fails to give exact extent and identity of the land he is claiming. His action should be dismissed. See Rufa v. Rickerts 2 WACA 95 Udofia V. Afia. See also Arabe V. Asanlu (1980) 5-7 SC 78″ per Musdsdapher, JSC (as he then was).” per HUSSAINI, J.C.A (PP. 9-11, PARAS. F-C) See also; ALH SULE SAWABA v MR S. O. GAADI (2015) LPELR-24372 (CA).” Per ABIMBOLA OSARUGUE OBASEKI-ADEJUMO, JCA (Pp 17 – 19 Paras C – A)
OLUFOSOYE & ORS V. OLORUNFEMI (1989) LPELR-2615(SC) #
“I think it is an elementary requirement of our land law that the first duty of any plaintiff claiming from the court a declaration of title to land is to show clearly the area of land to which his claim relates: Akinola Baruwa v. Ogunshola (1938) 4 W.A.C.A. 195.” Per CHUKWUDIFU AKUNNE OPUTA, JSC (Pp 19 – 19 Paras A – B)
OKONKWO & ORS V. KPAJIE & ORS (1992) LPELR-2483(SC) #
“Cases decided in appellate courts in this country for over a century show that it is impossible to grant a declaration of title to a party who has not proved the precise area to which his title relates. See Baruwa v. Ogunshola (1938) 4 W.A.C.A. 159; Udekwu Amato & Ors. v. Udogu Modekwu (1954) 14 W.A.C.A. 580; Agbonifo v. Aiwereoba (1988) 1 N.W.L.R. (Pt.70) 325 . Pursuant to this time-worn rule, it is my view that where a plaintiff fails to prove that his land extends to the whole area he claims but the court is satisfied that the defendant’s plan satisfactorily represents the land to which the plaintiff is entitled, the court in exercise of its equitable jurisdiction can tie a declaration in favour of the plaintiff to the defendant’s plan. In my view the principle that the plaintiff’s plan determines the area in dispute in a land case (for which see:Wilfred Okpaloka & Ors v. Ben Umeh & Anor. (1976) 9-10 S.C. 269 at 287: and Mabiaku Onotaire & Ors. v. Binitie Onokposa & Anor. (1984) 12 S.C.19 at 37) must be applied subject to this qualification.” Per PHILIP NNAEMEKA-AGU, JSC (Pp 44 – 45 Paras C – A)
