Background
The claimant, Mr. Peter Okosun Oboh, initiated Suit No. HCU/09/2016 before the High Court of Justice, Edo State, Uromi Judicial Division, on 2016. He sought a declaration that he is the rightful person to apply for statutory right of occupancy over 50 native plots at Idumu-Ogo Quarters, Obeidu 1, Uromi; a perpetual injunction against the defendant’s further trespass; and N500,000 in general damages for acts of trespass. The claimant testified that he inherited the land from his late father, who in turn was gifted the plots inter vivos by the claimant’s grandfather, in accordance with Esan native law and custom. He adduced evidence of customary cultivation by his great grandfather, subsequent farming by his father, a 1990 land survey plan, and three customary court judgments in favor of his father in disputes over the same land. In 2012 the defendant entered and farmed a portion of the land with permission for one season only, but in 2016 sold some plots to third parties, prompting this suit.
Issues
- Whether the claimant discharged the burden of proof to establish title to the 50 native plots at Idumu-Ogo Quarters under customary law.
- Whether, having established title, the claimant is entitled to a declaration of right of occupancy, a perpetual injunction, and damages for trespass.
Ratio Decidendi
The court applied established principles in customary land disputes and civil evidence law:
- Title to land under customary tenure may be proved by any one of five methods: traditional evidence, documents of title, acts of ownership, proof of connected land possession, or long possession (Idundun v. Okumagba (1976)).
- Unchallenged and credible evidence must be accepted and can satisfy the burden of proof on a preponderance of probabilities (Monkom v. Odili (2010)).
- General damages for trespass are presumed as the natural consequence of wrongful invasion and are assessed at the court’s discretion when no specific loss is proved.
Court Findings
The court noted that the defendant failed to file a Memorandum of Appearance or Statement of Defence and was thus foreclosed from contesting the claim. The claimant’s evidence of ownership, based on uncontroverted traditional history, was found credible. The narrative of deforestation and shifting cultivation by the claimant’s great grandfather, subsequent continuous farming and planting of economic trees by the grandfather and father, and the performance of burial rites in compliance with Esan custom, demonstrated long possession. The existence of a 1990 survey plan and three favorable customary court judgments fortified the claimant’s title by acts of ownership and confirmation by traditional tribunal. The court accepted evidence of trespass in 2012 and unlawful sale in 2016, finding that the defendant’s activities constituted wrongful invasion of the claimant’s exclusive possession.
Conclusion
Determining the sole issue in favor of the claimant, the court granted relief as prayed:
- A declaration that the claimant is the proper person entitled to apply for and be granted statutory right of occupancy over the 50 native plots at Idumu-Ogo Quarters, Obeidu 1, Uromi.
- A perpetual injunction restraining the defendant, his agents, servants, and privies from further trespass on the said land.
- General damages of N200,000 in favor of the claimant for the acts of trespass.
- Costs of N20,000 awarded to the claimant.
Significance
This judgment reinforces the evidentiary value of unchallenged traditional and possession evidence in customary land disputes. It affirms the five recognized methods of proving title under customary tenure and emphasizes the trial court’s duty to evaluate uncontradicted evidence for cogency. The decision illustrates judicial discretion in awarding nominal or modest general damages when specific loss is not quantified. It serves as a persuasive precedent in Edo State and other jurisdictions for safeguarding customary land rights, enforcing injunctions in trespass cases, and clarifying the impact of procedural defaults on defence rights.