“Before us it was contented on behalf of the appellant that the learned trial Judge was in error of law since the radical title of the Eyisha family to the land in dispute was one under native law and custom and the sale to Oseni Falade envisaged the disposal only of a similar interest; and that on completion of such sale by putting the purchaser in possession, the absolute interests of the Eyisha family under native law and custom are exhausted and no question arises of their having only transferred the equitable interest and retaining in themselves the legal estate. It was also submitted that despite the phraseology employed in the conveyance (Exhibit C) to the effect that an estate in fee simple was being transferred, the Court should hold that what the grantors therein could only transfer and what the conveyance infect transferred was the absolute Interest under native law and custom bought from the Eyisha family. On this point learned counsel for the appellant referred us to the cases of Oguntokun v. Amodu Rufai (1945) 11 W.A.C.A. 55 and Ogunbambi v. Abowaba (1951) 13 W.A.C.A. 222. We are of the view that these contentions are well founded. Undoubtedly the Eyisha family owned the land by virtue of native law and custom and where the entirety of their interests in land under such native law and custom is sold, it cannot be argued that they retained any further Interest in such land. A valid sale or transfer of the absolute interest under native law and custom completely exhausts the rights of the vendor and no question arises of transferring only some parts or aspects of those Interests.”
LawCompass
… the Digital Solution Research Tool
