DASHI & ORS.
V.
SATLONG & ANOR
(2009) JELR 49508 (SC) 
Supreme Court · SC.303/2002 · 30 Jan 2009 · Nigeria
·
·
Other Citations
DAMULAK DASHI & ORS. V. STEPHEN SATLONG & ANOR. (2009) 1-2 SC (2009) 5 NWLR (Pt. 1134) 281 SC CORAM
ALOYSIOUS IYORGYER KATSINA-ALU JSC
GEORGE ADESOLA OGUNTADE JSC
MAHMUD MOHAMMED JSC
FRANCIS FEDODE TABAI JSC
CHRISTOPHER MITCHELL CHUKWUMA-ENEH JSC Ratio Decidendi
Upgrade required to show details Core Terms Beta
judgment of the jos judicial division of the court
piece of farm land
customary tenant
upper area court
district head of chip
judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction
pw6
piece of land
trial upper area court
traditional requirements of customary tenancy
plaintiffs chris ekeakhogbe
customary tributes
presence of the parties
declaration of title
f. f. tabai
leading judgment
plateau state customary court of appeal
concurrent findings
2nd defendant
plea of res judicata
said interest
respondents
appellants
circumstances of this case
l.b.r.b.d.a
lower courts
1st appellant
plaintiffs
irimiya topsin
briefs of argument
late village head of minting
following terms
long possession of the disputed land
plateau state
customary tenants
respect of this farmland
late district head
suit no.puacp
present case
exhibits
previous case
evidence
fundamental features of a customary tenancy
defendants
F. F. TABAI, J.S.C (Delivering the Leading Judgment): This appeal is against the judgment of the Jos Judicial Division of the Court of Appeal on the 23rd of May 2002. The original action itself was commenced at the Upper Area Court, Pankshin in Plateau State sometime in 1994. The Plaintiffs therein are the Appellants in this Court. And the Defendants therein are the Respondents before us. The claim is expressed in the opening statement of learned counsel for the Plaintiffs Chris Ekeakhogbe at page 8 of the record. He said:-
"The Plaintiffs' claim is for a declaration of title to a piece of farm land situated at Minting in Chip District of Pankshin Local Government Council. The Defendant is a customary tenant to the Plaintiff and is now denying the Plaintiffs' title. Hence he does no longer comply with the traditional requirements of customary tenancy. The Plaintiffs therefore wish to retake possession and seeks a declaration of title in their favour."
This is reproduced by the trial …
