Background
On 2016-12-15, Hon. Justice Efe Ikponmwomnba delivered judgment in Suit No. 340/13 in the High Court of Justice, Edo State (Benin Division). The claimants1 Dr. Solomon Ikponmwonsa Omorodion, Dr. (Mrs.) Helen Edouwaye Imolode and Mrs. Osaro Ogbeide (representing two junior sisters and their issue) sought:
- Declarations that the transfer of property known as No. 135 Uselu-Lagos Road, Benin City (100ft 200ft, registered as 15:15:217) from Francis Esemuede Omorodion ( 2nd Respondent ) to Zenith Bank Plc ( 1st Respondent ) was fraudulent and void;
- A declaration that the inter vivos deed of gift dated 31 October 1979 from their late uncle, Edwin Ada Iyare Omorodion, to infant Francis Omorodion was a forgery and nullity;
- Orders setting aside the deed of gift and compelling evacuation by the bank; and
- An award of N250,000,000 as general damages for trespass.
The proceedings featured evidence from two claimant witnesses and three defence witnesses, extensive documentary exhibits and detailed written addresses citing authorities on bona fide purchase, forgery and property law.
Issues
- Validity of the 1979 deed of gift to an infant;
- Lawfulness of the subsequent sale to Zenith Bank Plc, a bona fide purchaser for value;
- Proof of allegations of fraud and forgery beyond reasonable doubt;
- Whether the sale should be nullified and title set aside;
- Entitlement to general damages.
Ratio Decidendi
- Under Property and Conveyance Law, Cap. 129, s.17(3), a conveyance to an infant does not pass legal estate but creates a trust under s.35(1).
- Registered conveyances attract a presumption of regularity (Evidence Act 2011, s.150), rebuttable only by direct, credible evidence (s.155).
- A bona fide purchaser for value without notice acquires a valid title (see Ibiyeye v. Fojule (2006) 3 NWLR Pt.968 640).
- Allegations of forgery in civil proceedings must be proved beyond reasonable doubt (Evidence Act 2011, s.138(1)); the onus of proof lies on the party asserting fraud.
Court Findings
The Court analysed the evidence of each side:
- Claimants Evidence: PW1, an Assistant Chief Deeds Registrar, tendered registry documents (Exhibits A and A1) showing the original grant by the Oba of Benin and the deed of gift. PW2 (Mrs. Ogbeide) denied any valid customary marriage between the testator and Margaret, alleged forgery, and pointed to newspaper caveats. Under cross-examination she admitted competing proprietary interests and the lack of contemporaneous objection.
- First Respondent Evidence: DW2, a bank official, confirmed a proper Lands Registry search, purchase on 15 July 2008 for 439 million, lawful eviction of squatters, and over 400 million spent on branch construction. No caveat or lis pendens existed pre-sale.
- Second Respondent Evidence: DW3 (his mother) testified to a valid customary marriage in 1977, execution and registration of the gift deed in 2006, and the subsequent sale to the bank. She denied any forgery and maintained her husbands intention to benefit their son.
- Signature Comparison: Despite PW2s familiarity with the testators signature, the Court found no convincing differences to sustain a finding of forgery beyond reasonable doubt.
Credible evidence supported Zenith Bank Plcs bona fide status and the validity of the registered deed. The claimants failed to rebut the statutory presumption or to establish fraud.
Conclusion
As the claimants did not discharge the burden to invalidate the deed of gift or sale, and Zenith Bank Plc purchased in good faith for value without notice, all claims were dismissed.
Significance
This judgment reaffirms critical principles: (1) gifts to infants create trusts rather than legal estates; (2) registered deeds carry a strong presumption of regularity; (3) bona fide purchasers for value are protected against latent familial disputes; and (4) allegations of forgery demand proof beyond reasonable doubt. It underscores the importance of thorough registry searches and timely caveats in land transactions.