The Supreme Court of Nigeria has evicted Soun’s lawyer-son, Prince Adedapo Oyewunmi, one of the children of the late Soun of Ogbomoso, Oba Jimoh Ajagungbade Oyewunmi, after 20 years of avoiding rent obligation in Lagos.
Blueprint correspondent gathered that the eviction was effected over the weekend by the team of Sherif, led by Deputy Sheriff (DS) Abudu Rasheed Akinsola.
The eviction followed a Supreme court judgment against the Soun’s son while avoiding his lawful rent obligations at No 78, Hawksworth road, Ikoyi, Lagos.
Oyewunmi, a lawyer who was called to the Bar 39 years ago, is also an heir apparent to the Ogbomoso royal stool.
He was dragged by his landlord, Mr. Charles A.C. Ofili, before a Lagos state High Court in a suit No: LD/353/2008, filed before Justice K.O Alogba, over unpaid accumulated house rents which stood at N27million as at the end of May 2021.
The matter dragged for 14 years from the lower court to the Supreme Court, having started from 2008 and terminating 2022 at the apex court.
The legal tussle
In his testimony, the claimant’s attorney-Abdulmalik Ora Egbunike, had tendered in evidence his statement on oath dated 27th March, 2008 and Power of attorney dated 28th April, 2003 as exhibits.
The court said: “In Exhibit-C10, he stated the facts of his appointment as attorney, the taking over of management of the property in issue ever since, in the course of which he related with the Defendant who had been a tenant thereof.
“He thereafter demanded payments of outstanding rents for 1st August, 1994 to 31st July, 2003 at N80,000:00(Eighty thousand Naira) per annum from Defendant.
“After discussions with Defendant, he further offered him a short Lease of the property from 1st August, 2003 to 31st July, 2005 at a yearly rent of N,500,000(Four Million Five Hundred Thousand Naira). Defendant did not pay the outstanding rent and did not respond to the offer above until he was served with a notice of quit.
“Defendant raised some issues about renovations he carried out and after meetings both parties agreed and his rent was reviewed at N2,000,000(Two Million Naira) per annum which he accepted to pay. He nonetheless failed to do so; or respond whatsoever.
“Where upon a reminder dated 10th February, 2006 was served on him. He then replied by his letter dated May 12, 2006, to liquidate his outstanding between June and August 2006 by installments, again, he reneged and consequently he was served with a Notice of Owner’s Intention to Recover Possession dated 29th June, 2007. Upon joint inspection of the property, it was agreed that the property needed some minor repairs and major repainting which the defendant had earlier promised to carry out, but did not.”
In his evidence, Oyewunmi who personally testified as Witness 1, “denied that the Claimant is the beneficiary of the property – No 7B, Hawksworth Road, Ikoyi, as the last will of the deceased landlord bequeathed only No 7A Hawksworth Road to him; and so he’s not entitled to the rents thereof Lagos.
“Also that Claimant’s Attorney herein or any of the other supposed beneficiaries of his late landlord, had no lawful authority to manage the same.
“Also that the Power of Attorney Exhibit-C1 is of extremely suspicious origin, in particular as all Donees are resident abroad, and the document was not notarized to attest its validity.”
“Also that he was not at any time contacted by the Executrix of his late landlord or any of the Donees of Exhibit – C11, to pay rent to Claimant’s Attorney. That he had entertained the demands from CW 2 and actually paid some rent to him in the mistaken belief that he was so authorized ; but later discovered he was not.
“Furthermore that the Will of the deceased owner is silent on who the property devolved to, nor did the Claimant show him proof that he’s entitled to rents of the property.”
Court rules
In his ruling, Justice Kazeem Olanrewaju Alogba, now the Chief Judge of Lagos state, held that “the Defendant cannot approbate and reprobate on the entitlement of the Claimant to the property in dispute having recognised and dealt with Attorney in respect of same in the past i.e before filing of this case in Court and in particular as stated in Ex—C9 which he personally authorised and signed.”
On the decision by the defendant “to place undue emphasis on where the Notary stated her names and signed as being of a “Witness”, the trial judge averred that “I think this is just playing to the gallery and an attempt to dwell on form rather than substance.”
The Judge further said: “From his total testimony and demeanor while testifying, I am of the humble conclusion that the Defendant was not acting in good faith in this case and was most economical with the whole truth as to his dealings with Claimant (Through his Attorney) on the one side and the ownership of the property in dispute, on the other side in this case. He was not a truthful witness.
“I see him as a person who is intent on avoiding his lawful obligation to pay rent whilst retaining possession of another person’s property , possibly perpetually. He had remained in the property for such a long period as claimed in his case without paying his rent, the accrual of which he has not denied.”
“The defendant presented himself in this case as a perfect example of what the judicial authorities called “bad Tenant”.
“The Claimant is therefore entitled to bring his occupation of the property to an end,” the court further declared.
Consequent upon this, the judge ruled: “I therefore enter Judgement in favour of the Claimant and Order that the Defendant shall yield up vacant possession of the property situated and known as No 7B Hawksworth Road Ikoyi, Lagos to the Claimant forthwith.
“Indeed, the Defendant did not controvert Claimant Witnesses testimony on the claims for cost of renovation and repainting and mesne profit on the property.
“I therefore also enter judgment in favour of the Claimant against the Defendant as follows: The sum of N200,000:00(Two Hundred Thousand Naira) only for renovation and repainting of the property in dispute.
“Mesne profit in the sum of N166,667:00k from 1st August 2007 until possession is finally given up by the Defendant.
“The cost of N400,000:00 (Four Hundred Thousand Naira) only as cost of this action against the Defendant in favour of the Claimant.”
And rather than complying with the judgement, Oyewunmi headed to the Court of Appeal, Lagos Division, for a redress, where he also lost out in a judgement delivered March 9, 2021.
Ruling on the suit CA/L/17/2019, Justice Isaiah Olufemi Akeju held thus: “In the instant case the lower court not only reviewed and analyzed the evidence of the parties but also fully evaluated same before arriving at the conclusion that the suit succeeded whereupon all the reliefs sought by the Plaintiff were granted.
“The decision of the lower court is therefore based on the concrete evidence before the court and therefore not perverse. The judgement of the lower Court ought not to be disturbed or upturned and it is hereby upheld.
“The second issue is also resolved against the Appellant. Having found upon this second issue that the whole judgement of the lower court is upheld, it has definitely and obviously become an idle exercise to go into the remaining issues formulated by the appellant which issues relate to the reliefs sought in the Suit.
“Upon the resolution of these issues 1 and 2 in favour of the Respondent, the appeal has failed and it is consequently dismissed. Parties are to bear their own costs of the appeal.”
The duo of Justices Mohammed Baba Idris and Uchechukwu Onyemenam of the Court of Appeal also agreed with the lead judgement.
He, however, returned to the Court of Appeal and filed an appeal and application for stay of execution as the landlord wanted to throw out his thing by applying to the sheriff for execution of the judgment.
The claimant later proceeded to the Supreme Court, where he suit SC/CV/859/2021, in a further and better affidavit to respondent’s counter affidavit dated 26th November, 2021, told the apex court he would be in dire straits if the judgment was executed.
The affidavit deposed to by Ajide Olawale, stated among others that: “Contrary to the paragraph 17 of the counter affidavit, the balance of convenience is in favour of the Appellant who is a tenant on the property and not the owner and stands to be in very dire straits if the execution is carried out pending the appeal, particularly as the financial state of the defendant is dismal.”
This was in support of his application to the Supreme court for stay of execution of the Court of Appeal Judgment fixed for hearing on 28th of February, 2022.
And upon listening to Oyewunmi’s lawyer, Charles Usen, the apex court declared the notice of appeal filed on behalf of the Ogbomoso-born prince as incompetent and struck out same.
Giving the ruling of the panel of five, Justice Olukayode Ariwoola, JSC said: “The appeal is struck out with costs of N1million to the appellant.”
On the panel were Ejembi Eko(JSC), Uwani Musa Abba Aji(JSC), Mohammed Lawal Garba(JSC) and Adamu Jauro (JSC).
It was also gathered that the prince is still occupying property without paying rent for over 16 years and yet refused to vacate as ordered by the courts until the ownership takes its possession.