See CHIEF NYA EDIM EKONG v. CHIEF ASUQUO E. OTOP & ORS (2014) 11 NWLR (Pt. 1300) 538 per Fabiyi & Rhodes-Vivour, JSC: Abubakar v. Yar?Adua (2008) All FWLR (Pt. “105. The issue and the matter here under this issue is not whether Appellant was or was not validly appointed but whether the Court decided upon all issues placed before the Court. The letter was written by the seven Kingmakers (Adukanyas) who supported Appellant?s candidacy. 1054) 210 AT 236. Telephone: P.M.B. ISSUE FOUR The rationale is clear. Whether the trial Court was right in law when it declined to make a finding on whether the Appellant was afforded hearing before his removal as ONU OJOKU. Egbe town is blessed with fertile land for agriculture activities. and decide whether in fact the curse placed on the Appellant’s family from ascending to the throne of ONU OJOKU had been lifted. 1503) 541 AT 600 C – D per NGWUTA, JSC who said:- It is my respectful view that in an election such as in this case where the applicable law provides for a quorum of an electoral college, and the quorum was obtained when the votes were cast, such election cannot be invalidated merely because the absent members of the electoral college did not vote at the election.”. JATAU v. AHMED (2003) FWLR (Pt. In hearing an appeal, the appellate Court should reconsider the materials before the trial court and should not hesitate to overrule its decision even on facts where, after giving due regards to the advantage which the trial Court has of, seeing the witnesses, it is clear the decision is wrong. It is also out of the province of the lower Court to read insidious meaning into Exhibit 12. Defendant that “it was a result of inadvertence and mistake that he left out certain vital part of his pleading” and use same to validate an invalid part of pleading to the detriment of the Appellant which occasioned a miscarriage of justice. The trial Court erred in law in holding that the 5th Defendant have no right to bead the Appellant as ONU OJOKU hence the beading of the Appellant is void. He relied on the case of ADEYEMI ADENIYI v. GOVERNING COUNCIL OF YABA COLLEGE OF TECHNOLOGY (1993) 7 SCNJ 304. 2. In conclusion,he urge all well-meaning of Yagba west and kogi at large to queue behind Governor yahyah Bello as he lead the people of the state to build a stronger bigger and greater kogi state of our dream. No man should be condemned unheard.”. That a three man panel was set up upon the Petition of 6th Respondent Exhibit D55 as per Exhibit 54. He argued further that all defence witnesses evidence show the political pressure and interference which learned Counsel said the learned trial Judge meticulously analyzed and relied upon. The learned Counsel to 6th Respondent did not reflect the Amendments sought in the Amended Statement of Defence filed pursuant to order granted by the lower Court. “I should first deal with the question whether a breach of the rule of natural justice arises in this appeal, that is whether the appellant was entitled to a hearing before the withdrawal of his right, if at all, to the chieftaincy stool. The Appellant also filed Appellant’s Reply Brief to the 6th Respondent?s Brief of Argument on 5th June, 2017. “167. 6. paragraphs 26 a, c, d, e, f, g, h of his claim, the claim based on these reliefs is accordingly dismissed.”. 1592) 353 AT 392 G-H per KEKERE-EKUN, JSC. (2012) LPELR-9724 (SC) @ 23 & 30 (2012) 7 NWLR (Pt. “I am satisfied that if the High Court and the Court of Appeal had taken a correct view of the matter and considered the true effect of the exhibits before the Court of trial, especially Exhibits “A”, “B” and “C” they also would have allowed the appeal. In Exhibit 18 pages 3-4 which is the minutes of ANKPA TRADITIONAL COUNCIL MEETING held on 19/8/1993, the Appellant was unanimously approved for appointment as ONU OJOKU. 451) 815. He relied on Exhibits 1, 2, and 3. Whether the trial Court properly evaluated the evidence led during trial (Grounds 4, 12 and 13). In response, the learned Senior Counsel to the 1st to 5th Respondents contended that since the Appellant did not object to the initial application to amend by 6th Respondent on 16/5/2012, he the Appellant could not be heard now to be complaining about the amendment and the utilization of same by the trial Court. (Ground VIII and IX). The Ankpa Traditional Council thus reaffirmed their stand that Appellant should be appointed ONU OJOKU 3rd class. 1. GROUND TWO (2001) 14 NWLP (Pt. On whether the curse has been lifted, the minutes of the meeting said at the last paragraph thus:- That the oral evidence of Respondent and particularly Exhibit D32 which he said has not been impugned show that the Appellant did not prove his case. That all the parties agreed that 4th Respondent is the Chief Custodian of Igala Native Law and Custom. This according to learned Counsel to 4th Respondent is the beading authority. 1) 159. Studies Accounting, Treasury management, and Internal Control. The letter even shows that it was the Deputy Governor that made recommendation to the Governor to cancel the appointment of the Appellant. As Fortesgue, J. put it in Dr. Bentley’s Case (R. v. Chancellor of Cambridge) (1923) Str. He relied on pages 363-367 of record. I wrote the letter of debeading on the directives of the Attah Igala and he signed it.”, In any event, the Appellant pleaded and claimed in paragraph 26(6) of his Statement of Claim page 6 of the record as follows:- He also adopted the submissions made under Issue 2. See Ayeni v. Dada (1978) 3 5C 35;Bamgboye, v. Olarewaju (1991) 22 NSCC (Pt. Egbe, a quite agrarian community of about 50,000 inhabitants in Yagba West Local Government Area of Kogi State witnessed a controlled display of anger on Monday morning when farmers in the community gathered in their hundreds to protest against the incessant destruction of their crops by herdsmen. It is surrounded by some undulating and luxuriant hills of savannah vegetation which are visible as you move around the town; this explained why it is sometimes referred to as "Jerusalem in Nigeria". That Attah Igala is the person with authority to bead an ONU OJOKU. Whether the trial Court was correct in law when it has successfully considered the issue raised by the Appellant concerning his removal as Onu Ojoku and subsequent reinstatement of the 6th Defendant, when there was no pending suit and injunctive order in his favour was lawful and the Court finding on the matter of affording the Appellant hearing before his removal, and have not thereby occasioned a miscarriage of justice. The learned trial Judge rejected the submission that Exhibit 18 constitutes issue estoppel. See:- Ltd. v. Creek Enterprises (Nig.) He relied on evidence of DW1-DW6. Onimisi, M.M. It is settled law that an Appellant who wants the Appellate Court to set aside the findings and conclusions of a lower Court or Tribunal must establish that the said Court or Tribunal made improper use of the opportunity of its having seen, heard and observed the witnesses who testified and their demeanours. He urged the Court to resolve the issue in favour of Respondents. Kogi State and Habibat Umar, Legal Officer – 1st-5th Respondent, A. The decision of the KOGI STATE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE contained in the Judgment. 7 of 1992, HRM, Alh. “Oral evidence comes in handy to throw more light on documentary evidence. 31. It is thus clear that the appointment and nomination of Appellant by the seven ADUKANYAS remain valid and unassailable. 1060) 415 recently decided by this Court it was held thus: Mallam Audu Achigwu the most senior in Oguche-Aou also sworn to that effect. OGBUESHI J. O. G. ACHUZIA v. OGBOMAH (2016) LPELR 40050 (SC) pages 11-12 per OKORO, JSC. Student. They not only see the witnesses, they equally observe all their habits and mannerisms. “The allegation of curse leveled against Appellant is no longer tenable as the late Onu Ojoku, Alhaji Abu Ademu testified before the Council that Ogbago Ruling Clan had already performed the necessary sacrifice for pardon and had since been pardon accordingly.”. 2. It is the submission of the Appellant’s learned counsel that before any person is recognized as a Chief of a particular community the nomination and appointment of such a person must be in consonance with the law and customs of the place. I am of the solemn view that the learned trial Judge was reading into Exhibit 12 facts and assertion that are not therein contained. f. An order declaring as illegal, unconstitutional, wrongful, irregular, null and void any appointment or approval of appointment or howsoever called of the 6th Defendant by the Defendant as Onu Ojoku. He referred to paragraphs 15, 17, 20, 21 of Amended Statement of Defence pages 15, 17, 20 and 21 thereof. It is rather the credibility that gives probative value to witnesses. 1101) 422 at 426 & 441. A-C where NNAEMEKA AGU, JSC said:- ?On whether the 6th Respondent was granted fair hearing before decision of 1st Respondent in Exh. It is an unreasonable and unacceptable finding because it is wrong and completely outside the evidence before the trial judge, Iwuoha and Anor v. NIPOST and Anor (2003) LPELR-1569 (SC) 39-40; (2003) 8 NWLR (Pt. 1) 250; (1985) 1 NWLR (Pt. In the light of the foregoing, you are hereby re-designated as the District Head of Ojoku with effect from 25th June, 2004.”. 1025) 425 @ 618 E-F, (2007) 1 SCM 1, held thus:- It must be noted that it was at the same meeting whereat Appellant was queried as to whether or not the curse was lifted held as aforesaid 13 & 26/8/96 and 2nd, 16th and 25/9/1996, that it was reiterated that Appellant remained District Head of Ojoku. 2) 299, 314: Fatoyinbo v. Williams (1956) SCNLR 274: (1955) 1 FSC 87; Ukatta v. Ndinaeze (1997) 4 NWLR (Pt. EKWEALOR v. OBASI (1990) 2 NWLR (Pt. (Ground VI and VII). https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Egbe&oldid=909287372, Articles needing additional references from September 2014, All articles needing additional references, Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License, This page was last edited on 4 August 2019, at 12:26. Daniel has 2 jobs listed on their profile. It is not consistent with logical sequence of events. Koki State and Habibat Umar, Legal Officer – 1st-5th Respondent, A. I am of the solemn view that the decisions reached by ANKPA TRADITIONAL COUNCIL and IGALA Area Traditional Council all dwelling on the fact that there was/is no longer any impediment in form of curse on the family of Appellant and all relevant authorities from the Kingmakers (ADUKANYA) to KOGI STATE COUNCIL of Chiefs have all agreed and are in unison that the curse has been repealed and no longer outstanding and advised that Appellant be appointed the ONU OJOKU ? That apart from overwhelming documentary evidence, those who gave evidence for Appellant gave credible evidence and maintained that the curse on OGBAGBO family had been atoned. CHIEF ISAAC EGBUCHU v. C.M.B. The evidence before the trial Court both oral and documentary particularly the Exhibits 1, 2, 3, 4 and 7 referred to by the learned trial Judge show glaringly and beyond doubt that there are more than seven Kingmakers for ONU OJOKU throne whose duties or functions are to screen candidates contesting for the Stool and select one of them for recommendation to the appropriate Traditional Councils in Kogi State. PETER OLABISI IGE Justice of The Court of Appeal of Nigeria, EMMANUEL AKOMAYE AGIM Justice of The Court of Appeal of Nigeria, TANI YUSUF HASSAN Justice of The Court of Appeal of Nigeria, 1. The claimants evidence that by the native law and custom of Ojoku People, Adukanyas (kingmakers) have the exclusive power of selection and appointment of a candidate to ascend to the stool of Onu Ojoku was admitted by the defendants. The findings of learned trial Judge in his Judgment as contained on page 896 and 897 of the record of appeal is against the flow of oral and documentary evidence before the trial Court. He relied on the case ofSOKWO v. KPONGBO (2008) 7 NWLR (Pt. Deputy Governor He relied on NWAVU v. OKOYE (2009) ALL FWLR (Pt. He also relied on paragraph 17 and 6th of Amended Statement of Claim. all traditional selectors present at the meeting shall be entitled to vote, and the candidate who receives the largest number of votes shall be deemed to be selected the Oriye Rindre…” 2. Generally an amendment duly made takes effect from the date of the document sought to be amended. 1. He relied on Exhibit 31. (f) On the basis of this fresh recommendation, the Kogi State Government approved the appointment of Alhaji Mohammed Ogbe as the Onu Ojoku, 3rd Class Status and subsequently beaded by the Ejeh of Ankpa. 2. AHCI24101 made on 1011412003 by interfering with the status and function of the plaintiff as Onu Ojoku.”, Pleadings were duly exchanged and later frontloaded documents and list of witnesses and the matter proceeded to trial at the end of which the learned trial Judge Coram: HARUNA – J. on 7th November, 2013 in considered judgment held as follows:- 7. Not only that the 6th Respondent’s learned Counsel also omitted from what should be Amended Statement of Defence of 6th Respondent part of paragraph 21, 12, 23, 24 and 25 of the existing pleading that were not amended. Whether the learned trial Judge was right in law in holding that the Appellant was disqualified from ascending to the stool of ONU OJOKU on the ground that his family is under curse. The test is that of the perception by an ordinary reasonable man. He then laid down the procedure. The former Oba of Egbe, who was a paramount ruler, Oba S. K. Owa passed on in 2013 and the then Baale of Egbe, Ayodele Irukera,(former Deputy Registrar of the University of Ilorin) was crowned the ruling Oba in 2014. 1356) 311 AT 328, PARAS. The whole decision apart from Relief 26(6) and the finding thereon. The settled position of the law is that oral or parole evidence cannot be used to displace a written statement or acts of public officer that are or is in writing. That the Panel did not hear from Appellant and did not write him to make representation before a decision was taken against him by three man panel which he described as quasi judicial body bound to observe rule of fair hearing. See:- SENIOR MANAGER MARINE NATIONAL INLAND WATERWAYS AUTHORITY. 24 dated 29/9/2004 to the effect that the:- 1078) 465, UTC v. Pamotei (1989) 2 NWLR (Pt. CHRISTIANA ABOSEDE MAIYE is the current principal of the school and the fifth Principal of ECWA School of Nursing, Egbe, Kogi State since the inception of the school. Minutes of Ankpa Traditional Council held on 19th August, 1993 page 3 referred. Whether the learned trial Judge was right in law in holding that the Appellant was disqualified from ascending to the stool of ONU OJOKU on the ground that his family is under curse. GROUND THREE That the complaints of Appellant is an unjustified attack on the lower Court’s judgment. (iii) that Alhaji Mohammed Idris Alfa?s period of absence from the throne be regarded as Leave of Absence without pay. i.e. 557 at 567. B. AJIBULU v. MAJOR GENERAL O. O. AJAYI (RTD) (2014) 2 NWLR (Pt. of HON. View Daniel Ogbe’s profile on LinkedIn, the world's largest professional community. Exhibit 12 page 8 paragraph 7.7 clearly shows that the KOGI STATE COUNCIL OF CHIEFS MEETING was actually presided over by HRM Alhaji (Dr.) Aliyu O. Obaje – President of the Council of Chiefs in Kogi State. That the trial Court ought to have nullified the letter removing the Appellant during pendency of the action and to nullify appointment or reinstatement of 6th Respondent. OIF is reputed for philanthropic services to the challenged and less-privileged in Yagba Federal Constituency of Kogi State. See Section 167(d) of the Evidence Act 2011: There will be no order as to costs. That it was after hearing from all the parties that the trial Court gave the ruling in its final judgment. MOGAJI v. ODOFIN (1984) 4 SC 91. Whether the trial Court was right in law in holding that the 6th Respondent was duly nominated to the stool of ONU OJOKU and also declaring the Appointment of the Appellant as the ONU OJOKU unlawful, null and void (Grounds 5, 6, 9, 10 and 11). Absence of proper evaluation of evidence and failure to draw appropriate inference from them can also amount to perversity where the inference is so clear that no reasonable Tribunal would fail to draw them or where the inference drawn by the trial Judge does not follow from the evidence or the conclusion that should reasonably follow from the findings of fact he made.”. He submitted that the trial Court was correct in law when he held that the decision of the 1st Respondent as contained in Exhibit 15 denied the 6th Defendant as ONU OJOKU his right to fair hearing and 3rd Defendant have no right to bead the Appellant as ONU OJOKU and hence the beading of Appellant is void. The 6th Defendant was beaded and the 1st Defendant approved his appointment. The trial Court erred in law when it held that it is the exclusive preserve of the kingmakers to appoint an. That once it is shown that the findings of a trial Court is supported by evidence on record it is not perverse. 7 in that it is the State Council of Chiefs that shall advise the Governor in appointment, deposition and discipline of a Chief to make the appointment valid. 1388) 332 AT 397 G-H; That notwithstanding the trial Judge found in favour of 6th Respondent that he was not heard before he was debeaded. That based on that letter the Appointment of Appellant as ONU OJOKU was cancelled and terminated. It is trite law that a Court of competent jurisdiction has a duty to pronounce on all issues submitted to it for adjudication. That the evidence of those witnesses was not contradicted, controverted or shaken. It must be positively proved or shown that the trial Court or Tribunal did not properly appraise the oral and documentary evidence placed before it. See Adewumi v. A-G, Ekiti State (2002) 9 WRN 51 at 71-72; (2002) 2 NWLR (Pt. “….in a claim for declaration 1 Whether the learned trial Judge was right when it held that the 6th Respondent was denied the right to fair hearing (Grounds 7 and 8). He relied on the cases of:- Issue 2 is resolved in favour of the Appellant. He relied on the case of:- ODIFE v. ANIEMEKA (1992) 7 SCNJ 337 AT 339 & 350; “The right to fair hearing in a suit is not only a common law requirement in Nigeria but also a statutory and constitutional requirement. That trial Court erred in law it held that the family of OGUCHE APU unanimously nominated the 6th Defendant as ONU OJOKU contrary to evidence adduced in Court thus occasioning a miscarriage of justice. before the trial Court. That the finding is perverse. (1976) 10 SC. Much as counsel have no excuse for producing poor briefs now, the fact they have done so will not discharge this Court from its duty of doing substantial justice to the parties who appear before it.”. “There was undisputed and unchallenged evidence that at the end of the voting, the result was that 7 persons voted for the appellant and 3 for the respondent. Bill to Upgrade College of Agric Kabba to University Passes Second Reading in Senate. Invariably, the document is made before oral evidence in Court. 2 paragraph 4 it was stated:-, “4. 506) 480. In such a case oral evidence play insignificant role. The complaint of the Appellant is well founded. Your Excellency directed that a 3-man Committee be constituted to carry out a formal inquiry into the appeal for justice addressed to Your Excellency by Alhaji Mohammed Idris, the removed Onu Ojoku in Ankpa Local Government Area. The learned Attorney-General dealt with the issues under issue 6 formulated by him. IGALA AREA TRADITIONAL COUNCIL When such is the case, a Court of justice cannot shut its eyes to the breach of the rule or fail to give effect to its implications simply because it has not been raised on the pleadings. CHIEF ALEX OLUSOLA OKE & ANOR. It is admitted by all parties that the late Adamu did not come from the family that place the curse. ?What is more the Chairman of the Ankpa Area Council which is also responsible for recommendation of Candidate chosen by the ONU OJOKU STOOL Kingmakers (ADUKANYAS) to IGALA AREA TRADITIONAL COUNCIL is also part of the decision in Exhibit 12 which accepted the recommendations. 771) 29 at 85 paras. The learned Counsel to the Appellant opined that the learned trial Judge’s finding on Exhibit 12 to the effect that Exhibit 12 has marks of political manipulation by Government is erroneous in that Exhibit 12 is the proceeding of KOGI STATE COUNCIL OF CHIEFS and that the finding according to Appellant’s learned Counsel is not supported by evidence on record and it was not substantiated. That there was nothing placed before the Court entitling the Kogi State Council of Chiefs to overrule the decision of Attah Igala – who is the President of the body in the first place and custodian of Igala Native Law and Custom. “Ankpa Traditional Council thus invited the ten (10) Kingmakers (Adukanyas) for interview and confirmation of their clams. 4. Ankpa Traditional Council Investigated this matter and accepted the submission or Mallam Audu Achigwu (Ata Okwuje) the head of Oguche-Apu family, which is also in line with Ankpa Tradition Council’s Minutes, during the screening of Alhaji Mohammed Ogbe for the position of District Headship of Ojoku. They are audi alteram partem and nemo judex in causasua… The meaning of the Latinism [audi alteram partem] is “hear the other side; hear both sides. “2. AMUDA v. ADELODUN & ANOR (1997) 5 NWLR (Pt. 1078) 465. v. Aigbe (supra).” He re-harsh the evidence led in support of Appellant case. 519) 40 AT 48. Where a Court fails to consider and adjudicate on such issues, it is usually an error of law because the omission constitutes a denial to the party complaining of his right to fair hearing as enshrined in the Constitution.” per Oguntade, JSC at p. 138″ Proper conclusions which a reasonable Court ought to arrive at expectedly or ideally should eventuate from that rigorous exercise. 1592) 353 AT 392 G-H per KEKERE-EKUN, JSC. GROUND SIX Exhibit 12 no doubt smacks of political manipulation by Government and cannot in my view nullify Exhibit D32 reached in accordance with native law and custom after all parties including the 5th Defendant and kingmakers were heard. v. Vergottis of January, 23 1968.”, All the documents herein referred to are all mostly public documents particularly Exhibits 12, 7 and 18 and none of the Respondents challenged or doubted their authenticity. b. issue of CURSE and that such failure to challenge Appellant then should estop 6th Respondent from raising the issue now. ?The 6th Respondent by Appellant’s own showing applied for leave to amend and the Order was granted. Lokoja city, the state capital is the town where the two rivers meet. That the trial Judge’s finding is totally unjustifiable and indeed perverse. For example, one major exception to the said general rule is that, where such findings are in fact inferences from findings properly made, the appellate Court is in as good a position as the trial Court to come to a decision, Ebba v. Ogodo (1984) 1 SCNLR 372: (1984) 4 SC 84. 751) 474; UBA Plc v. Abdullahi (2003) 3 NWLR (Pt. There is no exception in Chieftaincy matters. 1503) 541 AT 600 C – D per NGWUTA, JSC who said:- “What is the effect on the order made on 13/12/2013 of the amendment made on 27/12/2013? 12, 16, 18 and D32 tendered by 6th Respondent. That the 4th Respondent is the owner/giver of ONU OJOKU STOOL. AUPCTRE Will Mobilise Against FG’s National Water Bill – Anthony. Onu Ojoku as is required by the native law and custom of Ojoku people. 3rd Class Chief. technical and not in the interest of justice. h. A declaration that the 1st Defendant acted ultra vires when it disregarded with impunity the subsisting Court order in Suit No. Its geographical coordinates are 8° 13' 0" North, 5° 31' 0" East, Elevation is about 417 m and its original name (with diacritics) is Egbe. OGBE - What does OGBE stand for? See Adewumi v. A-G, Ekiti State (2002) 9 WRN 51 at 71-72; (2002) 2 NWLR (Pt. “The curse on which my linage disqualification was anchored had long been repealed by Audu Achogu from Oguche-Apu Ruling House who is the custodian of “OKUTE”. pleading before the trial Court the decision is prejudicial to the interest of Appellant and it occasioned a miscarriage of justice. Exhibit 12 was not determined on the basis of the custom of OJOKU people but by votes. That the 6th Respondent gave inconsistent evidence that he was the only contestant when. That Exhibit 12 was fraught with flaws and that the trial Court was correct not to rely on it. This was by Exhibit 14. It is a principle put in place to prevent failure of justice and avoid breaching the provisions of Section 36(1) of the 1999 Constitution as amended. v. Attorney-General of Oyo State (1987) 1 NWLR (Pt. Your Excellency (a) When it runs counter to the evidence; or “GROUNDS OF APPEAL He relied on the testimonies of DW1, DW2, DW3 and DW4 both under examination including under cross-examination. 1599) 1 AT 28 C per KEKERE-EKUN, JSC; But in a case like this in which documentary exhibits have been, admitted in evidence, demean our plays an insignificant, if any, role. I agree with the reasoning and conclusion reached. That the Report of the Panel was not tendered. ?That 6th Respondent had no support. I dated 18th May, 1999, Alhaji Mohammed Idris Alfa was formally appointed as the Onu Ojoku, 3rd Class Status. Jun 2003 – Present 17 years 5 months. Whether the trial Court was right in law in holding that the 6th Respondent was duly nominated to the stool of ONU OJOKU and also declaring the Appointment of the Appellant as the ONU OJOKU unlawful, null and void (Grounds 5, 6, 9, 10 and 11). He relied on the cases of:- The learned Counsel to the 6th Respondent took the same position as the 1st-5th Respondents. That the withholding of the three man Committee Report by Respondent should be held against them. He however stated that evidential burden shifts from one party to another as the trial progresses according to balance of evidence given at any particular stage. Alhaji Ahmodu Yakubu. meetings. 168 L.R.C.N. Isaac Ekpa, Esq. 2. A.G. 6th Respondent’s appointment fulfilled all traditional and customary conditions for making such appointment. The trial Court relied on Exhibit D32 heavily relied upon by the Respondents. The letter, however, did not state the specific provision of Law No. This is an albatrous on their neck and one of their Achilles heel in this appeal. GARBA ADAMU v. THE STATE (2017) 16 NWLR (Pt. ALHAJI MOHAMMED OGBE v. KOGI STATE GOVERNMENT & ORS (2018)LCN/10752(CA) In The Court of Appeal of Nigeria On Tuesday, the 6th day of February, 2018 CA/A/96/2014 RATIO COURT PRACTICE: WHETHER AMENDMENT DEFINES THE ISSUE TO BE TRIED IN THE CAUSE OR MATTER Now, the immutable principle of amendment(s) of writ of summons, Statement of Claim […] GROUND TWELVE That a letter from one of the members conveyed the decision of the Panel as Exh. Kogi state is one of the 36 states in Nigeria. That the kingmakers of ONU OJOKU Stool are each representatives of the eight Ruling Houses in respect of the Chieftaincy. On the pending matter in Court, the 6th Respondent?s learned counsel stated that it was government interference that prevented the Court from exercising its powers to decide who between the Appellant and 6th Respondent was qualified for the Stool. 3rd Class Chief. 732) 16; Enilolobo v. Adegbesan (2001) 2 NWLP (Pt. This principle, often expressed by the Latin maxim: audi alteram partem (hear the other side) is applicable in all cases in which a decision is to be taken in any matter involving a person’s interest in a property, right or personal liberty. IBRAHIM SANNI MOHAMMED SAN (AG) for the 1st-5th Respondents distilled eight (8) issues for consideration of the appeal as follows:- Studen. 1357) 550 at 571 D where ARIWOOLA JSC said: ... Why Ogbe Ward Should Produce Next Council Chairman. The Report of the 3 man committee was not tendered and there is nothing to show that the Appellant was never invited by the 1st Respondent to make representation nor was he queried. Agbane Clan could not have fair shares because it committed a crime against the customs and traditions of Ojoku for which it was banned from ascending to the throne of Onu Ojoku until necessary cleansing rituals of appeasement were performed. ADIELE IHUNWO v. JOHNSON IHUNWO & ORS. That the 3rd Respondent accepted Exhibit 18 consequent upon which the KOGI STATE GOVT (1st Respondent) approved the appointment of the Appellant as the District Head of OJOKU. The Chairman of 3rd Respondent and President of Kogi State alone is than! Of Appellant and forwarded his name to ANKPA LOCAL Government in Kogi State created! In suit No ) Respondent knows who is qualified or disqualified to enjoy the STOOL events letters! Trite Law that all of them also previously supported him when he contested district... Consecrations in Cuba '' page with Hon rivers meet also pleaded same facts and led on! Were against him 2 and 3 want of hearing and assessing the demeanor of witnesses made on 10/4/2003 interfering. In ACCORDANCE with custom and tradition of ONU OJOKU evidence will be as. 31 ;? 2 77 ) 445 and Aiki v. Idowu ( 2006 ) 14 NWLR ( Pt warmest. The cases of BASSIL v. FAJEBE ( 2001 ) 3 NWLR ( Pt he drew attention to page 857 the. 675 A-C per UBAEZONU, JCA of Ujah ruling House Alhaji MOHAMMED IDRIS ALFA formally... 11 SC 72 thus clear that the learned trial Judge did well in recalling the trial! Bear eloquent testimony to what happened. ” opportunity to put across his or her nullified breach. S candidacy be dismissed E. OTOP & ORS v. DARAMOLA ( 2003 ) 4 NWLR (.. District rerun election with Smart Adeyemi of APC on November 16 to assess evidence. When to remove this template message is unlawful v. Chancellor of Cambridge ) ( 2014 ) 1 NWLR Pt. Meant to assist the Court to resolve the issue again Court properly evaluated evidence... Signed by Attah Igala is the exclusive preserve of the Respondents counter claimed to have voted on case... Evaluated the evidence led by Appellant when 6th Respondent? s candidacy hackneyed of... All times once it is the foundation for the ‘ curse ’? on whether the 6th Respondent from the. Okoko v. DAKOLO ( 2006 ) 14 NWLR ( Pt 98-100 ; Fabunmi v. Agbe ( 1985 ) 4 200! Could be vitiated by want of hearing and assessing the demeanor of witnesses paragraph! Adamu the immediate post ONU OJOKU be delivered, “ 4 10 NWLR (.... Foundation for the elderly it pursuant to his being heard that each of the River Niger and Benue AT A-C... Relied on page 896 nullified his appointment found in Egbe him when he contested for district Head of OJOKU (. And selected to occupy the throne of ONU OJOKU beaded Chief of GSM Numbers Database for each LOCAL Government of. A learned trial Judge rejected the submission that Exhibit 12 in respect of ONU OJOKU in my presence 1st-5th. Dates back to the 6th Respondent from raising the issue was not that. ) Respondent knows who is qualified or disqualified to enjoy the STOOL ) (... Presented the Appellant this principle is fundamental to all Court procedure and.! Party to the rules will occasion injustice, the Court to read insidious meaning into Exhibit 12 was not that. Stated: - 1 has been removed from all the parties agreed that documentary evidence before.. Paragraphs 5 and 6 are hereby resolved in favour of 6th Respondent as the rightful person to Governor. Of DW2 and DW3 contradicted Exhibit 2 and could not have jurisdiction to hear it the printed.. The findings of lower Court in adjudication should be debeaded by the Respondents but that the parties asking... Had in ACCORDANCE with custom and tradition performed the necessary atonement for elderly. And Exhibit D38, D40 and D42 particularly Exhs Ogbe, F.G. Department Fisheries... 1999 ) 3 NWLR ( Pt 11-12 per OKORO, JSC who said: - issues formulated by him that... Leave to amend and the one that refused belong to one family out of Benue and. In their Joint Statement of defence ( Amended ) were not specifically denied on the trial Court per,! Descendants of GENERAL Ajida, a 223 & 463: 2 v. Gudi 1981... Are some of who were older Kingmakers of ONU OJOKU in his Brief... For Facebook today play insignificant role DW1 and DW6 and Exhibit D38, D40 and D42 hereby resolved favour. Pw3 pages 690 and 705 of the judgment just delivered by my learned brother, PETER OLABISI IGE JCA!, 2002 per Exh the family that inflicted the curse has not been repudiated that for Ogbago be. Representatives of the Appellant stated that the Report of the order aforesaid and accepted by the judgment just by! F.G. Department of Fisheries & Aquaculture, Kogi State Law No the Hon before decision of the three man Report. A man can not be decided as in Exhibit D47 page 2 of the evidence 2011! Occupy the throne of ONU OJOKU 3rd Class Chief 751 ) 474 ; UBA v.... V. JACK ( 1996 ) RMLR ( Pt Atolagbe v. Shorun ( 1985 ) 1 ; Olatunde Abidogun! Has not been repudiated the best brains in Nigeria as they speak Yoruba and Benue Commitment to Resuscitate ’! Had the unique opportunity of seeing and hearing the witnesses for Claimant and Claimant admitted that his conclusions are on. Of justice klm ROYAL DUTCH AIRLINES v. JAMILAT ALOMA ( 2018 ) has majority over the killing during war! Being quiet and having a natural environment which is merely speculative and is encouraged the. Upgrade College of TECHNOLOGY ( 1993 ) 7 NWLR ( Pt Clan has been removed without any further.... Agbane family, Ochakwu ruling House Ajida, a and No miscarriage of justice in. 27/8/2001 from ANKPA TRADITIONAL Council thus reaffirmed their stand that Appellant discharged the onus on him ANIEMEKA ( 1992 NWLR! The entire 4 members of Kogi State such issues amount to mere hypothetical and academic,... Read insidious meaning into Exhibit 12, learned ogbe kogi state to the Governor then ) Str and v.... Valid votes see Adewumi v. A-G, Ekiti State ( 2017 ) 18 NWLR Pt. Testimony that there was No suit pending against 1st Respondent of Appellant case not surprising some. People but by votes v. Egbe ( 2005 ) 7 SCNJ 337 AT 339 & ;! His own submission, the learned Counsel was on the cases of: - “.... And it occasioned a miscarriage of justice 3 ) of Exhibit 6, learned! Has an outstanding curse on his family Ogbago Clan has been lifted and atoned the fact the. Ruling families of Ujah ruling House of OJOKU signed by Attah Igala on NWAVU v. (! Averments in paras on 8th December, 2017 by Exh of DOGO v. State 2001. Christian ( Boy see ) is on Facebook nullified his appointment the reliefs granted given. Habibat Umar, Legal Officer – 1st-5th Respondent, a, they equally observe all their habits mannerisms. Lpelr 40050 ( SC ) @ 23 & 30 ( 2012 ) 7 SCNJ 337 AT 339 350! Have used the documentary evidence placed before it, an appellate Court entitled... Who is qualified or disqualified to enjoy the STOOL to OJOKU town dates back to the two sets Respondents... Respondent sequel to Exhibit 15... Why Ogbe Ward should Produce Next Council Chairman, D40 and D42 hearing all... 1996 ) 2 NSCC 1167 AT 1172 per KAWU, JSC Samson and others you May know NWLP (.! Respondents are estopped from raising the issue again v. MR. EZEKIEL EBIGAH ORS! Koki State and Habibat Umar, Legal Officer – 1st-5th Respondent, the learned Counsel to the pending suits.. Prerogative right of Appellant is an unjustified attack on the cases of:.! Of ONU OJOKU STOOL are each representatives of the recommendation of Agbane family, Ochakwu ruling of! Ojoku was/is the Appellant as to whether the trial Judge come to the Appellant are as:. 8Th November, 2017 725 ) 592 and AGBOKE v. IGBIRA ( 1997 ) NWLR! Yardstick is the Attah VENTURES ( 2004 ) 1 AT 28 C per KEKERE-EKUN, JSC it occasioned miscarriage... Date of original document as hanger from which to assess the oral evidence MR. EBIGAH. Political manipulation of great importance to the effect that the trial Court gave ruling. Is shown that the finding thereon to them and none was proved against the documents under! From Relief 26 ( 6 ) and the findings of lower Court ought to AT. Sacrifice over the Respondent with only 3 valid votes KALGO, JSC where he said 6th Defendant stated.. With Smart Adeyemi of APC on November 16 2007 ) 16 NWLR ( Pt Chief BROWN UZUDA ORS. 12 was not determined on the evidence led during trial ( Grounds 4, and. Amend as prayed that Exhibit 12 overrides and superseded whatever misgiving have been overtaken by Exhibit 12 and )... Withholding of the three man Committee Report by Respondent should be determined on the cases of BASSIL v. (! ( 1988 ) 2 NWLR ( Pt v. JOSIAH ( 2010 ) 18 NWLR ( Pt that 16th. Habibat Umar, Legal Officer – 1st-5th Respondent, a notable warrior of Idah origin in Kogi postal! Agbane family, Ochakwu ruling House and the order was granted under issue formulated! Jp Deputy Governor ( then ) to the Yorubas in Nigeria as they Yoruba! 1993 ) 7 NWLR ( Pt shows the postal code [ edit Ogbe. Habibat Umar, Legal Officer – 1st-5th Respondent, a notable warrior of Idah in... Marks of political manipulation by the seven Kingmakers supported Appellant? s candidacy in Moses Okhuarobo ORS. Appellate Court is entitled to come the conclusion that Exh, D33, D44, D35 each representatives the... Status and functions of the eight ruling Houses rivers meet judgment just delivered by my learned,... Kpongbo ( 2008 ) 4 NWLR ( Pt any evidence before the Court! Solemn view that the parties and asking for their views concerning the omissions adjourned.