CITIZENS COMPASS —The Appeal Court, Lagos Division +, has adjourned till April 9, 2024, the suit challenging the judgment of a Lagos High Court, delivered by Justice M. A. Savage, which ratified Kabiru Adewale Shotobi as the Oba Ayangburen of Ikorodu, Lagos State.
The sitting was held last Thursday.
The three-member panel presided over by Justice Muhammed Mustapha adjourned the suit to enable the Appellants regularise their pending applications.
Other members of the panel are Justice Folashade Ojo and Justice Abdullahi Bayero.
The Appellants (Lambo branch of Lasunwon ruling house) are challenging the installation of Mr. Kabiru Adewale Shotobi as the Oba Ayangburen of Ikorodu, Lagos State, and prayed the court to set aside the judgement of the lower court.
The appellants/applicants are Mr. Matthew Shodipo, Omobo Sokelu, Shakiru Shodipo, Mr. Nurudeen Fakomaya and Mr. Albert Ania.
The family is praying the court to allow the appeal and set aside the judgment of the lower court.
The appellants in their Notice of Appeal, filed by their Lawyer, Mr. Adedamola Solesi, stated that the trial judge erred in law in holding that 3rd to 6th Respondents were not parties to Suit No (KD/57/2007 and therefore not bound by the decision in that case.
They urged the court to hold that the 3rd-6th respondents are kingmakers of Ikorodu and privies to Mr. Z.O Aro in Exhibit A who was sued as and on behalf of the kingmakers.
Besides, appellants stated that the trial judge erred in law in holding that Clause 2 of the consent judgment in Suit No IKD 57/2007 did not preclude the Adegorushe branch from presenting a candidate nor preclude the second respondent from being nominated as candidate for the vacant Ayangbure title of Ikorodu.
The appellants argued that the trial judge misdirected himself in law and thereby came to a wrong conclusion that the Obas and Chief laws definition of Oba and Chiefs are Paramount and therefore, all the reliefs sought in the originating motion must fail.
“The interpretation by the Honourable court took away cause of action as brought by the applicants and extended it beyond the reliefs sought by the applicants into the response sought by the respondents.
“The interpretation of the Honourable court by reference set aside the Judgment of Abiru J., (as he then was) in suit No. IKD/57/2007, a relief not sought by the applicants.
“The learned trial judge misdirected himself in holding that suit No. IKD/57/2007, is subsisting having not been appealed against yet, that 3-6 respondents are not bound by it but bound only by his judgment.
“The trial judge erred in law in holding that all reliefs sought in the originating summons must fall and indeed dismissed the same.
“The learned trial judge, having extensively dealt with the issue of waver raised by the respondents, refused and neglected to ascribe nor articulated on the issue of estoppel in pairs, raised by Appellants nor pronounce the same.”
