CASE TITLE: MUSTI & ANOR v. KUBURI INTL TRADING CO. LTD & ANOR (2026) LPELR-84166 (SC)
JUDGMENT DATE: 5TH JUNE, 2026
PRACTICE AREA: PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE
LEAD JUDGMENT: JOSEPH OLUBUNMI KAYODE OYEWOLE, J.S.C.
SUMMARY OF JUDGMENT:
INTRODUCTION:
This appeal borders on Civil Procedure.
FACTS:
The Appellants here were defendants at the trial Court while the Respondents herein were the Plaintiffs. The Respondents took out a writ of summons against the Appellants in respect of a dispute over a piece or parcel of land in Maiduguri, Borno State wherein they sought the following reliefs:
1. A declaration that the defendants are trespassers to the land in dispute situate along Baga Road Maiduguri covered by a customary right of occupancy Nos 484 and 485 registered at the land and survey as Nos BO/731 and BO/864 on Maiduguri sheet No. 19, Maiduguri Borno State.
2. The sum of N500,000 damages for trespass against the defendant.
3. A perpetual injunction restraining the defendants either by their self, agents, servants and assigns, successor in title and any person claiming through them from further trespassing on the land in dispute.
4. Plus the costs of this suit.
The 1st Appellant was 1st Defendant at trial. He filed a statement of defence which was later amended twice, the extant pleadings being the Further Amended Statement of Defence of 1st Defendant. Significantly, the 2nd Appellant as 2nd Defendant did not file any pleadings.
At trial, both sides called oral and documentary evidence in support of their respective cases. The Respondents called two witnesses while the Appellants called three witnesses, including a Court official who was subpoenaed to tender a couple of judgments and enrolled orders.
After considering the adduced evidence, the trial Court, delivered judgment wherein he dismissed the suit in its entirety and affirmed ownership of the land to the defendants. In addition, 20,000 cost was also awarded to the defendants to cushion their expenses.
Dissatisfied with the decision of the trial Court, the Respondents appealed to the Court of Appeal via a notice of appeal. The Court of Appeal delivered its judgment after considering the arguments proffered by the two sides. The Court of Appeal held that the findings of the trial Court were perverse and accordingly set them aside. The appeal was allowed and judgment was accordingly entered for the Respondents in line with their reliefs.
Dissatisfied with the judgment of the Court of Appeal, the Appellants filed a Notice of Appeal to the Apex Court.
ISSUES FOR DETERMINATION:
The appeal was determined on the following issues:
1. Whether or not the Court below, was in the entire circumstances of this case, right when it set aside the Judgment of the High Court and entered judgment in favour of the Respondents.
2. Whether or not the Court below, had Jurisdiction and was right when it disregarded the decision of C.B. Ogunbiyi J (as he then was) in exhibits DW3B and DW3C to set aside the decision of the High Court and enter Judgment for the Respondents herein.
DECISION/HELD:
The appeal was held to be lacking in merit and was accordingly dismissed.
RATIOS:
- ACTION – PLEADINGS: Importance and nature of pleadings
- ACTION – PLEADINGS: Effect of uncontroverted averment(s) in pleadings
- ACTION – PLEADINGS: Whether parties are bound by their pleadings; effect of failure to adduce evidence in support of pleadings
- APPEAL – FRESH POINT(S) ON APPEAL: What amounts to a fresh issue
- APPEAL – APPEAL TO THE SUPREME COURT: Whether the Supreme Court can entertain an appeal directly from the High Court
To read the full judgment or similar judgments, subscribe to Prime or Primsol
