Clearly, the evaluation and ascription of probative value to the evidence adduced by the parties is the primary duty of the trial Judge seized of the matter. Ordinarily, the appellate Court should not, and may not interfere in the finding of fact by the trial Court where the duty has been properly carried out by the trail Judge. See SALIHU OKINO VS YAKUBU OBANEBIRA & ORS (1999) 12 SCNJ 27; (1999) 13 NWLR (Pt. 636) at 535; DAN AWAZA BASHAYA & 7 ORS VS THE STATE (1998) 4 SCNJ 202; (1998) 5 NWLR (Pt.550), page 351. Therefore, where a wrong conclusion is reached upon such evolution, the appropriate thing to do is for the appellate Court to interfere and set it right in line with its statutory duties. See ACHILIHU VS ANYATONWU (2013) 1 SCNJ 332 at 359 thus: “The exception is where there is misdirection by the trial Court. Misdirection occurs where issues of fact in the case for the parties or the law applicable to the issue raised are not fairly appraised or considered or misconceived or the law applicable is incorrectly applied by the trial Court as a result there would be a miscarriage of justice if the decision reached is allowed to stand.” Per BAGE, J.S.C. at P. 16, Paras. B-C.
DR. CHIKE ONYEKWULUJE v. G.B ANIMASHAUN (2019-LCER-36851-SC)
Facts
The 1st Respondent (G.B. Animashaun) is the administrator of the Estate and younger son of Late Badaru Asuni Animashaun (B.A. Animashaun). The 2nd Respondent is a co-administrator of the estate of the deceased. The Appellants are the children of the Late G.E.N Onyekwuluju, the substituted Appellant who was the Solicitor and Caretaker of the landed property in dispute.
The land in dispute was the property of the Late B.A. Animashaun which was granted under a Kola Tenancy by the Mgbeleke family of Onitsha situate and lying at No. 23 New Market Road, Onitsha. Upon his death, the landed property devolved to his heirs as a family property as he died intestate. Upon the death of I. B. Onyekwuluje (elder son of B.A. Animashaun) in 1975, the 1st Respondent indicated that a purported lease had been granted to the Appellants in respect of the landed property without his knowledge or consent. The makers of the purported lease are I. B. Onyekwuluje (who is a distant relation of the Badaru Family) and G.E.N. Onyekwuluje.
Consequently, the Respondent reached out to the late G.E.N. Onyekwuluje to protest the purported lease, The matter was sought to be resolved amicably by the parties, but was not successful leading to this suit, which essentially seeks to set aside the purported deed of lease.
Issues
1. Whether the Court of Appeal was right in introducing Yoruba Customary Law into the case and relying thereon in coming to its decision in the case.
2. Whether the Defendant-Appellant was obliged to call Raji Babatunde Animashaun to testify for him and whether any adverse presumption arose against the Defendant-Appellant under Section 149 (d) of the Evidence Act, Cap 112 Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 1990, in that he did not call Raji Babatunde Animashaun to testify for him.
3. Whether the Defendant-Appellant needed to call Barrister Henry Afolabi Lardner to testify as for whom he prepared Exhibit `S’.
4. Whether there was evidence that the Badaru Animashaun family consented to the lease granted to the Defendant-Appellant.
5. Whether the Court of Appeal was not wrong in holding that the findings of the trial Court were perverse and on embarking on its own review of the evidence led at the trial.
6. Whether the Court of Appeal was not wrong in its appraisal and evaluation of the evidence led before the trial Court and whether its findings thereon are wrong.
7. Whether the issue of delay in seeking to set aside the lease granted to the Defendant-Appellant by the Badaru Animashaun family was properly raised or considered by the Court of Appeal.
8. Whether the Plaintiffs-Respondents pleaded fraud in their Statement of Claim as prescribed by law.
Lead Judge(ment)
SIDI DAUDA BAGE, J.S.C. (Delivering the Lead Judgment)
Held
Unanimously dismissing the appeal.
Alternate Citations
Read Full Judgment
Counsel:
N.F.P. Egonu with him, Emmanuel Udu…..For Appellant
And
Oladipo Akinosun with him, Lovett Okocha…..For Respondent
For Appellant(s)
For Respondent(s)
Counsel’s Photograph(s) Needed.