site logo

ALHAJA ABENI BAKO V. G. A. SUNMOLA (2002)

case summary

Supreme Court of Nigeria

Before Their Lordships:

  • Salihu Modibbo Alfa Belgore, JSC
  • Idris Legbo Kutigi, JSC
  • Sylvester Umaru Onu, JSC
  • Aloysius Iyorgyer Katsina-Alu, JSC
  • Akintola Olufemi Ejiwunmi, JSC

Parties:

Appellant:

  • Alhaja Abeni Bako

Respondent:

  • G. A. Sunmola (Alias Bako) et al.
Suit number: SC. 30/1995

Background

This case originates from the Ikeja High Court, where Alhaja Abeni Bako, the plaintiff, sought a declaration of right of occupancy over a parcel of land along with damages for trespass and an injunction against G. A. Sunmola and others. The crux of the legal contention arose when the trial judge rejected a survey plan that the plaintiffs wished to submit as evidence.

The trial judge’s ruling on 31 May 1990 rejected the survey plan. Subsequently, the court dismissed the plaintiffs’ case on 1 June 1990 due to their failure to proceed with the case. The plaintiff filed an appeal, which was withdrawn later, leading to a complicated legal trajectory.

Issues

The Supreme Court addressed two primary issues:

  1. Was there a competent appeal against the trial court’s judgment dismissing the plaintiffs’ case?
  2. Was the Court of Appeal correct in setting aside the trial court's judgment based on the aforementioned withdrawal?

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court found that the Court of Appeal had erred in allowing an appeal that was no longer active due to the withdrawal by the plaintiffs. Since the judgment of the trial court dismissing the case did not form part of the issues raised in the initial appeal, the Court of Appeal's subsequent ruling was fundamentally flawed.

Court Findings

The court reasoned that the plaintiffs had initiated separate appeals against different decisions made on different days. Not only had the plaintiffs withdrawn the appeal against the dismissal of their claim, but they also failed to address the critical issues adequately in their submissions. The Supreme Court ruled that the lower court had acted beyond its jurisdiction in setting aside the trial court's judgment.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court ultimately set aside the Court of Appeal's decision deeming it void, reinstating the trial court's original dismissal of the case. The defendants were awarded costs of N10,000 as compensation.

Significance

This case is significant as it underscores the importance of procedural accuracy in appeals and highlights the consequences of withdrawing an appeal. It serves as a cautionary tale about the critical nature of timely and competent legal filings in respect of ongoing litigations.