Parties seek judicial interpretation of court judgment on disputed land

Following a recent  second decision by the Supreme Court in the case between the estate of Gbadamosi Bandele Eletu Vs Ojomu Chieftaincy Family (the ‘Ojomus’) over a disputed vast area  of land, the parties to the case are seeking  judicial interpretation of the court judgment which has raised more questions than it answered.

The Ojomus and the Gbadamosi Bandele Eletu family had been embroiled in  litigations over the vast area of land in Eti-Osa Local Government Area  which a historical background to the dispute made available to BusinessDay says belonged to the Ojomus from time immemorial.

According to the historical background, the Ojomus, being owners of the vast area of land sharing  borders with the Oniru, the Elegushi, and the Olumegbon, and in exercise of their ownership rights, sold by Deed of Conveyance, 254.558  hectares of land to late  Gbadamosi Bandele Eletu. This conveyance, dated August 23, 1977, was subsequently registered as No.36 on page 36 in Volume 1648 of the Lands Registry office in Lagos.

In 1981, acting pursuant to the powers granted him under the Land Use Act, the governor of Lagos State, revoked all existing rights in land in Eti-Osa and Ibeju Lekki Local Government areas of the state. The Ojomus challenged this acquisition of their ancestral land in Suit No. ID/1883/89 between Alhaji Fatayi Ajetunmobi and others vs Attorney General of Lagos State and the court agreed with the Ojomus and invalidated the acquisition.

In 1993, the Lagos State government published another revocation notice No 20 Volume 26 (Revocation Notice No 34) of May 13, 1993. In this Revocation Notice, the state took time to note the earlier judgment of the court in Suit No. ID/1883/89 and then went ahead to acquire the land belonging to the Ojomus for “overriding public interest”. In 1994, vide Lagos State government official gazette No. 24 Vol. 27, dated June 23, 1994, the state government excised land totaling 604.19 hectares to the Ojomus.

Chuka Uroko

It was at this point that trouble started because a portion of the land thus excised to the Ojomus, falls within the area that had been sold by the Ojomus to late Gbadamosi Bandele Eletu before the revocation, and this area totals approximately 50 hectares.

The children of late Gbadamosi Bandele Eletu entered unto portions of the land in question, and the Ojomus sued them as trespassers in Suit No LD/2642/1995.  F.R.A. Williams (SAN) represented the Ojomus, and Chief Akinbiseyin (SAN) appeared for the estate of Gbadamosi Bandele Eletu. Parties agreed to submit their documents and further agreed to frame the questions to be determined by the court , asking what rights, if any, remains for either party, after the revocation of 1993; and if the revocation is valid, can the estate of Gbadamosi Bandele Eletu, validly claim any portion of the land excised to the Ojomus after the revocation.

Moshood Olugbani agreed with F.R.A. William’s submissions, and held that the inheritors of late Gbadamosi Bandele Eletu were trespassers, their conveyance having been validly revoked by the Lagos State Government. The inheritors of late Gbadamosi Bandele Eletu appealed to the Court of Appeal, and the Court of Appeal further affirmed the decision of the high court. Not satisfied with this, the inheritors of late Gbadamosi Bandele Eletu thereafter appealed further to the Supreme Court, and the Supreme Court in its judgment of July 12, 2013, found that the inheritors of late Gbadamosi Bandele Eletu were entitled to the 10 hectares earlier granted to them in Suit No. M/779/93.

The interpretation to the judgment which the parties are seeking wants answers to the posers as to what becomes of the revocation by Lagos State Government;  what is the status of the Notices of Excision and Certificates of Occupancy issued by the Lagos State Government, and more  importantly, how exactly does the Supreme Court expect the Ojomus to give land outside their control?