SEHINDEMI & ORS.
V.
GOVERNOR OF LAGOS STATE & ORS.

(2006) JELR 49340 (CA)    

Court of Appeal  ·  CA/L/392/99 ·  5 Jan 2006 ·  Nigeria
 · 
Other Citations
Sehindemi v. Gov., lagos State (2006) 10 NWLR (Pt.987) pg.1
CORAM
ISA AYO SALAMI Justice of The Court of Appeal of Nigeria KUMAI BAYANG AKAAHS Justice of The Court of Appeal of Nigeria MUSA DATTIJO MUHAMMAD Justice of The Court of Appeal of Nigeria
Core Terms Beta
appellants
statement of claim
respondents
plaintiffs
court
reasonable cause of action
locus standi
seventh respondents
learned trial judge
community centre
writ of summons
land use act
submission of the learned counsel
trial judge
amended statement of claim
senior counsel
common ground
following issues
lagos executive development board
plaintiffs action
residential housing scheme
second defendants
surulere town planning scheme
adjoining land
agency of lagos state
allotees of the open space
amended statement of claim of the appellant
amended statement of claim of the plaintiffs
benefit of the opinion of the learned trial judge
entire set of circumstances
high court of lagos state
issue of issues of locus standi
lagos state development
lagos state town planning law
legal rights
new points
parcels of land
portion of the land
procedure of this court
proposed conversion of the use of the open space
public interest
respective briefs of argument
respective counsel
respective statement of defence
right of occupancy
supreme court of england
wrong law

SALAMI, J.C.A. (Delivering the Leading Judgment): It is common ground that the parcels of land of both the plaintiffs and defendants were originally owned or vested in Lagos Executive Development Board now restyled Lagos State Development and Property Corporation an agency of Lagos State which was sued as first and second defendants.

The Lagos Executive Development Board created a residential layout and allocated plots to various individuals including the plaintiffs in the instant suit. At the time material to the sale to the plaintiffs certain portion of the land remained unsold or unallocated. It is that portion that has now been apportioned to the third to eighth defendants. The plaintiffs challenged the allocations and issuance of certificate of occupancy over the land to the defendants and the purpose to which the defendants are permitted to put their grants which is for building residential houses. It is pertinent that the plaintiffs have built their own residential houses on th…

There's more. Sign in to continue reading.

judy.legal is the comprehensive database of case law and legislation from Ghana, Kenya and Nigeria. Gain seamless access to over 20,000 cases, recent judgments, statutes, and rules of court.

Get started   Login