Effect of Failure to Satisfactorily Trace Line of Succession in an Action for Declaration of Title to Land

CASE TITLE: ADESINA & ANOR v. OLADIPO & ORS (2025) LPELR-81560(CA)

JUDGMENT DATE: 27TH JUNE, 2025

PRACTICE AREA: LAND LAW

LEAD JUDGMENT: EBIOWEI TOBI, J.C.A.

SUMMARY OF JUDGMENT:

INTRODUCTION:

This appeal borders on Proof of Title to Land.

FACTS:

This appeal is challenging the judgment of the Oyo State High Court sitting at Ogbomosho delivered on 28/5/2019 by B.A. Tailor J., wherein the claim of the Appellants who were Claimants in the lower Court was dismissed.

The Appellants claimed that the land in dispute belongs to the Claimants/Appellants, who generously granted the said land to the Defendants/Respondents as tenants who turned round to claim the land as theirs. It is the further case of the Appellants that the Respondents, as their tenants, are strangers in Ikoyi-Ile and therefore are not part of the ruling family in Ikoyi-Ile. The Respondents, on the other hand, are saying they have as much right to the land and to the stool of Onikoyi as the Appellants. The Respondents have, in exercise of their right of ownership, granted the land on lease to a third party, Globacom Telecommunication Company (Nig.) Limited. The trial Court agreed with the Respondents and therefore dismissed the Appellants’ claim.

Dissatisfied, the Appellants approached the Court of Appeal.

ISSUES FOR DETERMINATION:

The Court considered the following issues in the determination of the appeal, thus:

1. Whether the learned trial Judge was right by his decision dismissing the Appellants’ Claims against the 3rd – 5th Respondents in the suit that culminated in this appeal.

2. Whether having regard to the evidence adduced by the Appellants in support of their claims, the learned trial Judge was right in his decision that the appellants did not furnish any credible evidence that the land in dispute belongs to them.

3. Whether the learned trial Judge was right in not pronouncing on desirability or otherwise of an order of non-suit in the case after the parties had addressed the Court on the same sequel to the learned trial judge raising the issue suo motu.

4. Whether the judgment/decision of the Learned trial Judge was not perverse.

DECISION/HELD:

In conclusion, the Court dismissed the appeal.

RATIOS:

• COURT- DUTY OF COURT: Duty of trial and intermediate Courts to pronounce on all issues raised for determination; whether failure to do so will automatically vitiate its decision.
• EVIDENCE- BURDEN OF PROOF/ONUS OF PROOF: Whether a party must rely on the strength of his case and not the weakness of the case of a defendant.
• EVIDENCE- BURDEN OF PROOF/ONUS OF PROOF: Burden on a party to prove the existence of facts asserted; whether same shifts
• EVIDENCE- BURDEN OF PROOF/STANDARD OF PROOF: Burden and standard of proof for allegation of fraud.
• EVIDENCE- PROOF OF TITLE TO LAND: Ways of proving title/ownership of land/house.
• JUDGMENT AND ORDER- PERVERSE DECISION: Meaning of a perverse decision/judgment
• LAND LAW- DECLARATION OF TITLE TO LAND: Effect of failure to trace line of succession

To read the full judgment or similar judgments, subscribe to Prime or Primsol