Judgment
AMINA ADAMU AUGIE, J.S.C. (Delivering the Leading Judgment): The first Respondent, as Plaintiff, instituted the action that culminated in this Appeal at the Federal High Court, wherein he claimed the following Reliefs – a) A Declaration that the Plaintiff is entitled to the Statutory Right of Occupancy over Plot 109, located at Area A8, Wuse II District, Abuja, covered by Certificate of Occupancy No.
FCT/ABU/BA. 50. b) A Declaration that the purported revocation of the Plaintiff’s right of Occupancy and the purported allocation of same piece of land to the 3rd Defendant was and still is null and void and of no effect whatsoever. c) A Perpetual Injunction restraining the Defendants by themselves, their servants, agents, or privies from entering, doing anything on, or taking anything from the piece of land known as Plot 109, Wuse Il District, Abuja, and which is in the Plaintiff’s possession. d) The sum of Two Million Naira (N2,000,000.00) damages against the 1st and 2nd Defendants.
Initially, there were only two Defendants – the second and third Respondents. But, by an Order of the Court dated 20/1/1997, one “Nanfa Ponfa”, who was allocated the said Plot of land during the pendency of the suit, was joined as the “3rd Defendant’, and though, he was served with Court processes, he did not defend the action at the trial Court. He was not a Party in the appeal filed at the Court of Appeal, and he is also not a Party to the appeal in this Court.
The Appellant, who bought the said plot of land from Nanfa Ponfa, was joined on its own motion as 4th Defendant by Order of Court dated 13/3/2000. At the trial, the first Respondent, as Plaintiff, testified and called one Witness. The second and third Respondents, as the first and second Defendants, called one Witness. The third Defendant did not participate at the trial at all. The Appellant, as fourth Defendant, called its Property Manager, as Witness.
Learned Counsel filed and adopted their respective Written Addresses.
In the trial Court’s judgment written by Okeke, J., who heard the matter, but delivered in open Court on 11/6/2003 by Egbo-Egbo, J., he held as follows: The 1st and 2nd Defendants woefully failed to prove that the revocation notice, which is a sine qua non for a valid revocation of Plaintiff’s right of occupancy was served on him… Having failed to prove the service of the mandatory revocation notice on the Plaintiff, the purported revocation of the Plaintiff’s right of occupancy over Plot 109, A8, Wuse II District, Abuja is null and void and of no effect whatsoever.
