Daily News

Court enters consent judgment on Badagry land

0
court-enters-consent-judgment-on-badagry-land

By Joseph Jibueze

THE Lagos State High Court in Badagry has entered a consent judgment on the ownership of Imeke community land.

Justice S. I.  Sonaike adopted the terms of the settlement reached by parties in a suit by Toyin Hassan, Isaac Olorunsogo Ajayi and Lawrence Ogabi.

They sued for themselves and as representing other descendants of Oba Ajagun in Imeke.

The defendants are Ayo Piponsu, Dasi Gandogbe and Babatunde Piponsu (for themselves and on behalf of Tori-Love community of Badagry).

The others are Sunday Adegoke Ashade, Jonah Olabode Ashade, Nofiu Balogun and Badiru Momoh Amusa (for themselves and on behalf of Abon Family of Imeke, Badagry).

The claimants’ counsel, Mr J. O. Oluyede, prayed the court to enter the duly executed, filed and served terms of settlement dated January 11, 2019.

The application was not opposed by defendants’ counsel Shina Ayodele.

The judge held that the claimants/defendants to the counter-claim and the fourth to seventh defendants agreed that they are direct descendants of Oba Ajagun, the founder and first settler of lmeke land, including the land in dispute.

It is contained in a Survey Plan numbered SBS/275/039/2011/LA, prepared by Sunday Saidi and dated July 29, 2011, to the exclusion of other persons not being members of the claimants and fourth to seventh defendants/counter-claimants.

The court gave the land marked Parcel ’A’ in the Survey Plan numbered NNN/2536/013/2018/LA, prepared by Innocent Nmema dated May 30, 2018, known as Olobi, to the claimants as customary owners, to the exclusion of the first to seventh defendants/counter-claimants.

The judge, in line with the agreement, gave the piece of land marked as Parcel ’B’ in the survey plan, known as Ilobi, to the fourth to seventh defendants/counter-claimants as customary owners, to the exclusion of the claimants and first to third defendants/counter-claimants.

The land marked Parcel ’C’ in the same survey plan, known as Age Ero/Tori, was given to the Tori inhabitants represented by the second defendant to the exclusion of the claimants and first, third, fourth to seventh defendants/counter-claimants.

Justice Sonaike vested the land marked Parcel ‘D’ in the survey plan, known as Age-llobi/Lovi, on the Lovi descendants represented by the first and third defendants/counter-claimants, to the exclusion of the claimants and second, fourth to seventh defendants/counter-claimants.

It was further entered as consent judgment that all payments and other benefits accruable from all the 50 acres of land in Parcel ‘E’ in the survey plan for electrification project shall be shared equally by the claimants and defendants “provided that all such monies due shall be paid to the respective parties through their solicitors”.

Parties also agreed that portions of land Parcels ‘C’ and D’ that have been sold and/or occupied by the claimants and fourth to seventh defendants/counter-claimants as customary owners before the judgment “shall not be interfered with by the first, second and third defendants/counter-claimants”.

‘Federal High Court judges ‘humiliating’ female lawyers’

Previous article

Social, environmental factors behind Africa’s low COVID-19 cases — WHO

Next article

You may also like

Comments

Leave a Reply

More in Daily News