The Appeal Court, Lagos Division has fixed November 9, 2021, for the hearing of an appeal filed by the Lambo branch of Lasunwon ruling house that challenged the installation of Mr Kabiru Adewale Shotobi as the Oba Ayangburen of Ikorodu, Lagos State.
The appellate court, which was presided by Justice Joseph Ikyegh, adjourned the matter for hearing after granting appellants’ motion for extension of time that would enable them to regularise their brief of argument.
The Lambo had challenged the judgment of a Lagos High Court, delivered by Justice M. A. Savage, on May 24, 2015, in Suit No: IKD/454/2014, which ratified the Kabiru Adewale Shotobi as the Oba Ayangburen of Ikorodu Lagos State.
The appellants/applicants are Mr Matthew Shodipo, Omobo Sokelu, Shakiru Shodipo, Mr Nurudeen Fakomaya and Mr Albert Ania.
The family is praying to the court to allow the appeal and set aside the judgment of the lower court.
The appellants in their Notice of Appeal that was filed by their Lawyer, Mr Adedamola Solesi, stated that the trial judge erred in law in holding that 3-6th 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 3-6th 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 a 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 and 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 same.
“The leamed 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 on same.”