In the Supreme Court
On FRIDAY, 29TII JUNE, 2001
SC.163/1996
Before Their Lordships
SALIHU MODIBBO ALFA BELGORE JSC
EMANUEL OBIOMA OGWUEGBU JSC
SYLVESTER UMARU ONU JSC
UMARU ATU KALGO JSC
SAMSON ODEMWINGIE UWAIFO JSC
Between
CHIEF KALADA R. I. NTEOGWUILE
And
CHIEF ISRAEL U. OTUO
The plaintiff, now respondent originally sued one defendant - Chief Brown Brown - claiming a declaration that the Okan- Ama stool is the paramount Chieftaincy stool of Unyeada Town, that the plaintiff is the present incumbent on the said stool, a declaration that the defendant's forcible installation of himself as the Okan-Ama of Unyeada on 12th January, 1980, with the aid of armed policemen is contrary to Unyeada Native Law and Custom and is therefore null and void and perpetual injunction restraining the defendant from parading himself as the Okan-Ama of Unyeada. The present appellant applied to be joined as 2nd defendant. He was accordingly joined by order of court dated 28th July, 1980. Pleadings were ordered, filed and exchanged. The claim was amended with an additional reliefs to include a claim in general damages. The parties pleaded and relied on traditional history. The case of the plaintiff is that Otuo Ogbalakon was the reigning king of Unyeada Town in or about 1862. There was a war in which the town's army suffered a defeat. The king abandoned the town and founded another town which he named Unyeada. It would appear that in order to avoid confusion the earlier Unyeada was regarded as Old Unyeada. Otuo Ogbalakan continued to reign. The defendants denied that Otuo Ogbalakan was ever king of Unyeada, old or new. Rather they claim that Nteogwuile family was. At the end of the trial, the trial court found as follows: "Finally, the claim of the Plaintiff, except the part declaring that the Paramount Chieftaincy Stool in Unyeada Town is the Okan-Ama, the other claims of the NSCQR VOLUME 6 (2006) PAGE 1034 Plaintiff had not been established and are not, therefore, granted and are hereby dismissed." The plaintiff appealed to the Court of Appeal which by a unanimous judgment allowed the appeal and set aside the decision of the trial court. The 2nd defendant who survived the 1st defendant who had died at the close of the case at the trial court has now further appealed to the Supreme Court.