Background
General Jah Ewansiha (Rtd) (the Claimant) filed Suit No. B/679/2020 on 23 November 2020 in the High Court of Justice of Edo State, Benin Division, seeking declarations, injunctions and damages against Alex Osazuwa (1st Defendant), Persons Unknown (2nd Defendant), the Director, Edo State Geographic Information Systems (3rd Defendant) and the Governor of Edo State (4th Defendant). The Claimant asserted title to a 3.665-hectare parcel at Ward 30B Ogheghe Village Area, Benin City, under Certificate of Occupancy No. EDSR 17444 dated 2 May 2013. He alleged that the 1st Defendant fraudulently procured an undated Deed of Assignment over part of his land, invited unknown persons to inspect and cut portions of the land, and mobilized workmen to excavate and destroy his fence and caveat. He prayed for declarations of title and fraud, perpetual injunctions against all Defendants, exemplary damages of ₦10,000,000, costs of ₦2,000,000, and 25% post-judgment interest.
Issues
- Whether the Claimant proved legal and bonafide title to the land;
- Whether the 1st Defendant’s purported Deed of Assignment was fraudulent, illegal and void;
- Whether acts by the 1st and 2nd Defendants amounted to trespass;
- Whether perpetual injunctions should be granted against the Defendants;
- Whether exemplary damages, costs and post-judgment interest should be awarded.
Ratio Decidendi
- A Certificate of Occupancy is prima facie proof of title to land and, if unchallenged, suffices to establish ownership (Ilona v Idakwo).
- Unchallenged and credible evidence by a claimant can sustain his case, even in an undefended suit (Monkom v Odili; Adeleke v Iyanda).
- Fraud requires a misrepresentation made recklessly to induce another to act (Black’s Law Dictionary; Ojukwu v FRN).
- Trespass is any wrongful interference with exclusive possession of land (Black’s Law Dictionary; Oyewusi v Olagbami).
- Once title and trespass are proven, perpetual injunctions and appropriate damages including exemplary damages may be awarded (Lambe v Aremu; Eliochin v Mbadiwe).
Court Findings
The Court found that:
- The Claimant held an unchallenged Certificate of Occupancy (Exhibit A) and had exclusive possession since purchase in 2008.
- The 1st Defendant’s Deed of Assignment (Exhibit B) was procured without the Claimant’s knowledge or consent and was fraudulent, null and void.
- The 1st and 2nd Defendants trespassed by inviting strangers onto the land, excavating and destroying the fence and caveat, as shown in uncontroverted photographs (Exhibits F–F8).
- The 3rd and 4th Defendants, though nominal, confirmed the Claimant’s title and had no contrary evidence.
- Exemplary damages were warranted for the malicious and flagrant disregard of the Claimant’s rights, but the quantum must be reasonable and proven.
- Costs of litigation and solicitor’s fees proved by Exhibit G were properly claimed.
- Post-judgment interest should not exceed the statutory maximum of 20% per annum; the Court reduced it to 5% per annum.
Conclusion
The sole issue—whether the Claimant is entitled to all reliefs—was answered in his favor. The Court granted declaratory reliefs confirming title and nullifying the fraudulent assignment, perpetual injunctions restraining all Defendants from interfering with the land and recognizing any fraudulent documents, exemplary damages of ₦2,000,000, costs of ₦2,000,000, and post-judgment interest at 5% per annum.
Significance
This decision underscores the binding effect of an unchallenged Certificate of Occupancy and the judiciary’s strict approach to allegations of fraud and trespass. It affirms that uncontroverted evidence in undefended suits is sufficient to establish title, justifies perpetual injunctive relief to protect landowners, and illustrates judicial restraint in awarding exemplary damages and setting interest rates within statutory limits.