THE REGISTERED TRUSTEES OF THE ASSEMBLIES OF GOD MISSION
V.
MANCHIN

(2013) JELR 46224 (CA)    

Court of Appeal  ·  CA/J/78/2011 ·  27 Mar 2013 ·  Nigeria
CORAM
RAPHAEL CHIKWE AGBO Justice of The Court of Appeal of Nigeria IBRAHIM SHATA BDLIYA Justice of The Court of Appeal of Nigeria PETER OLABISI IGE Justice of The Court of Appeal of Nigeria
Core Terms Beta
appellant
respondent
mohammed yusuf manchin
evidence
sale of the land
nwlr pt
learned trial judge
lower court
case
mohammed yusuf
sale agreement
authority of the respondent
exhibit f
purchase price
burden of proof
adamu yusuf manchin
evidence of dw1
samchi esquire
brother mohammed yusuf manchin
existence of exhibits
parcel of land
agency relationship
virtue of exhibit
authorized agent of the respondent
cardinal points
case of niger progress ltd. v
case of rosenje v
cases of rosenje v
claim of the respondent
declaration of title
evidence shows
issuance of a statutory right of occupancy
judgment of the plateau state high court
meeting mohammed yusuf manchin
mohammadu manchin
muhammadu manchin
possession of the parcel of land
principal of the acts of the agent
resolution of the dispute
resume of the facts
rev. damulak
said mohammed yusuf manchin
said statement of claim
validity of exhibit f
various acts of ownership
view of the evidence of d.w

IBRAHIM SHATA BDLIYA, J.C.A. (Delivering the Leading Judgment): This is an appeal against the judgment of the Plateau State High Court in suit No.PLD/P.31/2006 between The Registered Trustees of the Assemblies of God Mission v. Adamu Yusuf Manchin, delivered on the 10th of October, 2008, by Justice D.G. Mann. The Respondent who was the Plaintiff before the lower court owned a parcel of land in Pankshin along Pankshin Mangu Road opposite Government Secondary School, Pankshin, adjacent Trinity Missionary College. He claimed he purchased the parcel of land from one Mr. Clement Yilkoba and Boba Bornkatda in 1994. He advertised the sale of the land to the Appellant who was the Plaintiff in the lower court. According to the Respondent they couldn't agree on the price so the sale did not materialize. The appellant, on the other hand, asserted that Respondent intimated him that his brother would see him for negotiation on the sale of the land. Few days later the Respondent's brother met the a…

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