Land Law (544)
HELD:
"The provisions of Section 44 of the land Use Act, makes the following provision:
HELD:
"Arguments have been made on the procedure for the revocation of a certificate or right of occupancy under the Land Use Act, circumscribed under Sections 28 (6) and (7) of the same Act.
HELD:
"Additionally, the Supreme Court has in a plethora of cases held that the plaintiff in a declaration of title to land must show the area of land with certainty.
HELD:
"Buttressing his position further, learned counsel referred to the case of Madu vs. Madu (2008) 2-3 SC (pt. 11) 109 @ 138 - 139, where the Apex Court held thus:
HELD:
"... Based on that fluid state of events, learned counsel for the respondent submitted that appellant having failed to trace the first allotee, who might have had title to the disputed plot, translates to the fact that claimants claim must fail and the trial Court right to have so declared.