[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"doc-seo-291908-105":3,"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":81,"doc-detail-291908-en":130},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"ok",{"site_id":7,"language":8,"slug":9,"title":10,"keywords":11,"description":12,"schema_data":13,"social_meta":74,"head_meta":76,"extra_data":78,"updated_unix":80},105,"en","alh-tajudeen-ibrahim-olagunju-v-alhaja-habibat-yahaya","ALH. TAJUDEEN IBRAHIM OLAGUNJU - V. - ALHAJA HABIBAT YAHAYA","","Court of Appeal (Ilorin Division) matter CA/IL/19/2000 concerning agency relationship, judicial notice, onus of proof, civil evidence, and land law. The dispute centers on competing claims to declaration of title, injunction against trespass, possession, account for rents, and damages. Appellant and respondent each pleaded purchase from a second defendant at different dates; the trial court found the second defendant lacked title at the appellant’s purchase time and held Ilorin was an urban area limiting statutory powers, thereby dismissing the appellant and granting respondent’s counter-claim and damages.",{"@graph":14,"@context":73},[15,34,56],{"@type":16,"itemListElement":17},"BreadcrumbList",[18,23,27,31],{"item":19,"name":20,"@type":21,"position":22},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",1,{"item":24,"name":25,"@type":21,"position":26},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/","Document",2,{"item":28,"name":29,"@type":21,"position":30},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/research-report/","Research & Report",3,{"item":32,"name":10,"@type":21,"position":33},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/alh-tajudeen-ibrahim-olagunju-v-alhaja-habibat-yahaya/291908/",4,{"url":32,"name":10,"@type":35,"image":36,"author":41,"headline":10,"publisher":44,"fileFormat":47,"inLanguage":8,"description":12,"dateModified":48,"datePublished":49,"encodingFormat":47,"isAccessibleForFree":50,"interactionStatistic":51},"DigitalDocument",{"url":37,"@type":38,"width":39,"height":40},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/alh-tajudeen-ibrahim-olagunju-v-alhaja-habibat-yahaya/291908.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":42,"@type":43},"วิน","Person",{"url":19,"name":45,"@type":46},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-10-18","2026-09-17",true,{"@type":52,"interactionType":53,"userInteractionCount":55},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":54},"ViewAction",7,{"@type":57,"mainEntity":58},"FAQPage",[59,65,69],{"name":60,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":62},"What main issue did the Court of Appeal address?","Question",{"text":63,"@type":64},"Whether, having regard to the pleadings and evidence at trial, the trial court acted properly in entering judgment in favour of the respondent.","Answer",{"name":66,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":67},"What did the appellant seek in the suit?",{"text":68,"@type":64},"Declaration of title, an injunction to restrain trespass, possession, an order for account for money received regarding the property, and damages.",{"name":70,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":71},"Why did the trial court dismiss the appellant’s suit and allow the respondent’s counter-claim?",{"text":72,"@type":64},"It found the second defendant had no title to the property when sold to the appellant and that Ilorin was an urban area, so the local government lacked statutory power to issue the right of occupancy and permit to alienate in favour of the appellant; it annulled the appellant’s documents and awarded damages to the respondent.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":32,"og:type":75,"og:title":10,"og:site_name":45,"og:description":12},"article",{"robots":77,"canonical":32},"index,follow",{"doc_id":79,"site_id":7},291908,1789647246,{"code":4,"msg":82,"data":83},"success",[84,88,92,96,101,106,110,114,119,122,126],{"id":22,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":85,"show_sort_weight":86,"slug":87},"Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":26,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":89,"show_sort_weight":90,"slug":91},"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":33,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":93,"show_sort_weight":94,"slug":95},"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":97,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":98,"show_sort_weight":99,"slug":100},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":102,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":103,"show_sort_weight":104,"slug":105},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":55,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":107,"show_sort_weight":108,"slug":109},"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":111,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":29,"show_sort_weight":112,"slug":113},8,30,"research-report",{"id":115,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":116,"show_sort_weight":117,"slug":118},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":117,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":120,"show_sort_weight":117,"slug":121},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":123,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":124,"show_sort_weight":123,"slug":125},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":127,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":128,"show_sort_weight":97,"slug":129},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":82,"data":131},{"doc_id":79,"user_id":132,"nickname":42,"user_avatar":133,"doc_module":4,"category_id":111,"category_name":29,"doc_title":10,"doc_description":12,"doc_content":134,"file_id":135,"file_url":136,"file_type":137,"file_size":138,"view_count":55,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":22,"is_downloadable":22,"audit_status":22,"page_count":127,"language":139,"language_code":8,"site_id":7,"html_lang":8,"table_of_contents":140,"faqs":141,"seo_title":142,"seo_description":12,"update_tm":80,"read_time":143,"preview_page_count":4},2336475104736,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/avatar/22000c4c5e0e5b17e70?x-image-process=image/resize,m_fixed,w_180,h_180&k=1786591360781797222","ALH. TAJUDEEN IBRAHIM OLAGUNJU  \nV.  \nALHAJA HABIBAT YAHAYA  \nCOURT OF APPEAL (ILORIN DIVISION)  \nCA/IL/19/2000  \nPATRICK IBE AMAIZU, J.C.A. (Presided)  \nWALTER SAMUEL NKANU ONNOGHEN, I.C.A.  \nJA'AFARU MIKA'ILU, J.C.A. (Read the Leading Judgment)  \nTHURSDAY, 12TH JUNE, 2003  \nAGENCY — Agency relationship — How created. CONTRACT - Agency - Agency relationship-How created. DAMAGES-General damages-Nature of.  \nEVIDENCE-Judicial notice-Enactments and statutes-Duty on courts to take judicial notice of-Section 74 of the Evidence Act.  \nEVIDENCE-Judicial notice-Fact judicially noticeable by court - Whether need be provedSection 73 of the Evidence Act.  \nEVIDENCE-Onus of proof-Proof in civil cases-Onus on plaintiff to succeed on strength of his own case—When can rely on weakness of defendant's case.  \nEVIDENCE-Onus of proof-Proof of an assertion-On whom lies.  \nEVIDENCE- Proof of civil case - Where defendant offers no evidence - Whether plaintiff ipso facto entitled to judgment.  \nEVIDENCE-Witnesses-Evidence adduced by a party's witnesses-Uniformity of- When useful.  \nLAND LAW-Declaration of title -Damages for trespass and injunction - Claim there forFailure of claim for declaration of title — Whether and when claim for trespass and, injunction can succeed.  \nLAND LAW—Land Use Act— Urban area—Designation of-Power of Governor of a State in respect of- Where derived.  \nLAND LAW-Trespass to land- What constitutes-Action therefor-Who can maintain.  \nLAND USE ACT- Urban area-Designation of-Power of 'Governor of a State in respect of—Where derived.  \nMAXIM- \"Nemo dat quod non habet\" -Application of.  \nTORT—Trespass to land— What constitutes—Action therefor-Who can maintain.  \nIssue:  \nWhether having regard to the pleadings ofthe parties and the evidence adduced at the trial, the trial court acted properly in entering judgment in favour of the respondent.  \nFacts:  \nThe appellant instituted a suit against the respondent. Subsequently, he applied for the joinder of a 2nd defendant. The appellant sought a declaration of title to a piece of land; an order of injunction to restrain the respondent from trespassing on the property; and an order for possession of the property. The appellant also sought an order of account by the respondent and the 2nd defendant of money received in respect of the property; and damages.  \nThe appellant averred that he bought the property from the 2nd defendant and paid the purchase price in two installments on 15th February. 1994 and 16th June. 1994. He however, did not plead that he was put in possession of the property after he purchased it. The appellant adduced evidence that he purchased the property from the 2nd defendant and was issued a right of occupancy over the property by the Ilorin West Local Government which also issued a permission to alienate the land in his favour. The appellant further adduced evidence that when the solicitor instructed by the 2nd defendant to sell the property demanded for the title documents of the property on behalf of the respondent, he, the appellant, gave the solicitor the purchase price paid by the respondent to return the money to the respondent. The appellant however did not adduce evidence that he was in possession of the property.  \nThe 2nd defendant on his part, filed a statement of defence in which he averred that the respondent purchased the property in dispute from him on 27th November, 1993. He further averred that the purchase price paid by the respondent was refunded to her through the solicitor involved in the sale of the property.  \nThe respondent, in response, filed a statement of defence and counter-claim against the appellant and the 2nd defendant. The respondent averred that she bought the property from the 2nd defendant and paid the purchase price of the property to the 2nd defendant on 27th November, 1993; and that the 2nd defendant immediately put her in possession and paid over to her all the rents he had collected from the tenants on the property in resp","cbCaip8BzZDs2lsF","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaip8BzZDs2lsF","pdf",256250,"English","# Issue\n## Whether the trial court acted properly in entering judgment for the respondent\n# Facts\n## Parties’ claims and pleadings\n## Evidence and trial court’s findings\n# Outcome","[{\"question\":\"What main issue did the Court of Appeal address?\",\"answer\":\"Whether, having regard to the pleadings and evidence at trial, the trial court acted properly in entering judgment in favour of the respondent.\"},{\"question\":\"What did the appellant seek in the suit?\",\"answer\":\"Declaration of title, an injunction to restrain trespass, possession, an order for account for money received regarding the property, and damages.\"},{\"question\":\"Why did the trial court dismiss the appellant’s suit and allow the respondent’s counter-claim?\",\"answer\":\"It found the second defendant had no title to the property when sold to the appellant and that Ilorin was an urban area, so the local government lacked statutory power to issue the right of occupancy and permit to alienate in favour of the appellant; it annulled the appellant’s documents and awarded damages to the respondent.\"}]","ALH. TAJUDEEN IBRAHIM OLAGUNJU - V. - ALHAJA HABIBAT YAHAYA | PDF",48]