Judgment
SAIDU TANKO HUSSAINI, J.C.A. (Delivering the Leading Judgment) : By way of the Writ of Summons filed along with the Statement of claim at the High Court of Justice of Kebbi State on 27/9/2017, the Claimants as the Appellants, sought a variety of reliefs against the Defendants, now Respondents, to wit:- 1. An order of declaration that the land in dispute described in paragraph 21 of the Statement of claim belong to the Claimants for themselves and the family. 2.
An order of perpetual injunction restraining the defendants by themselves, privies, assigns, agents, successors in title, representatives, from further encroaching on the land and from further asserting the title on the land as theirs. 3. The sum of N50,000.00 as the cost of this action as dictated by the Rules of the High Court below. The Originating processes were filed and served on the Defendants now respondents.
The Respondents in turn upon the receipt of those papers originating the action now filed their defence and denied the claim, hence the case proceeded into trial during which the Claimants and the Defendants respectively, elicited evidence through their witnesses.
Given the pleadings and evidence led, the case presented by the parties can be summarized thus; For the Claimants, they are the owners of the land in dispute which the Respondents now occupy that they inherited same through their father one Magaji who cultivated the land during his lifetime and upon his demise the land devolved on them. The land in dispute and other adjoining lands, according to the Claimants, was a virgin forest which their grandfather deforested and he was first to cultivate the land.
After the death of their grandfather by the name, Kondokaya, their father inherited the land and it was at that time Respondents’ grandfather, by name Maikidi approached their father for the use of the land for grazing purpose and their father obliged them. Defendants’ grandfather, it was contended, had been displaced from their original place of abode and therefore sought refuge with them at Zamare. Defendants’ Grandfather, it was alleged, had earlier … been given a portion of land to build their houses.
The portion of land in dispute is not where the Respondents’ grandfather built their houses but the land given to them for farming and grazing. The Claimants gave the description of the location of the land in dispute as being situate at Ripolo, Zamare in Yauri and contended that it is only of recent that the Respondents now lay adverse claims to ownership of the land to which they are customary tenants since the land in dispute was given to them (the Respondents) on loan hence the suit instituted against them for the recovery of this land. As indicated before the claim was denied.
