Skip to case content
Case Digest

REGISTERED TRUSTEES OF THE CHRIST APOSTOLIC CHURCH OF NIGERI (2002)

Court of Appeal (Ilorin Division)

Coram
  • Muritala Aremu Okunola, JCA (Presiding)
  • Patrick Ibe Amaizu, JCA
  • W. Samuel Nkanu Onnoghen, JCA (Read the Lead Judgment)
Parties

Appellant:

  • Registered Trustees of the Christ Apostolic Church of Nigeria Elder Oluwadare Dada

Respondents:

  • Oba Oladimeji
  • Alhaji Sadiku
Suit number
CA/IL/12/2001
Delivered on

Background

This case revolves around an appeal to the Court of Appeal regarding the ruling made by Hon. Justice D. F. Babalola of the Ekiti State High Court. The trial court had granted a motion for the joinder of the second respondent, Alhaji Sadiku, as a defendant in the original suit. The appellants, Elder Oluwadare Dada and the Registered Trustees of the Christ Apostolic Church of Nigeria, sought damages for trespass on their land.

Issues

The key issues at hand were:

  1. Whether the intervener, Alhaji Sadiku, had any interest in the land to warrant his joinder.
  2. Whether the lower court adequately evaluated the affidavit evidence before it made its ruling on the joinder.

Ratio Decidendi

The Court held that:

  1. A person with no claim of interest in the land cannot be a necessary party to the suit.
  2. Conflicting depositions require resolution through oral evidence rather than reliance solely on affidavit evidence.

Court Findings

The Court found that:

  1. There were irreconcilable discrepancies in the affidavit evidence provided by the respondents regarding the extent of land sold.
  2. The trial judge failed to order oral evidence to clarify these contradictions despite recognizing their existence.
  3. The second respondent could not claim an interest in the land as he had divested himself of that interest.

Conclusion

The appeal was allowed, with the Court remarkably setting aside the trial court's order granting the joinder of the second respondent as a co-defendant. It was declared that the second respondent lacked any interest or legal standing in the suit, having previously divested himself of ownership pertained to the land.

Significance

This ruling underscores the necessity for courts to resolve conflicts in evidence appropriately, where disputes arise regarding the interest in property and the parties involved. Additionally, it clarifies the criteria for establishing whether a party is a necessary participant in a legal proceeding regarding land ownership disputes.

Counsel:

  • A. O. Akanle, Esq. - for the Appellants
  • Sir C.R.A. Adedeji - for the Respondents