Ben Adaji Jalingo
The Taraba State High Court has dismissed a case of control of teritories against the Kwararafa Chiefdom of Gassol Local Government Area of Taraba.
Justice Silas Haruna, who delivered Judgement at the Taraba State High Court, Jalingo on Thursday, said that the plaintiff violated prefiling process by not issuing the pre-action notice to the defendant.
Justice Haruna upheld the Defendants’ argument that they failed to evoke the pre-action notice which was a prefiling requirement in suing a group or an organisation citing the case between Tukur VS Gongola state government 1989 and Adeniyi vs Federal Government of Nigeria 1981 (NWLR)
Our Correspondent reports that an originating summons brought to the court by Alhaji Mansur Mukaila and Comrade Haman Tukur (plaintiff) against the Kwararafa Chiefdom and Chief Methuselah Adamu, Third class chief of Kwararafa chiefdom (1 and 2 Defendants) in Suit No. TRSJ/135/2024 at the Taraba State High Court Jalingo.
The plaintiff brought the originating summons in pursuant to Order 1. Rule 5 and 6 of the Taraba State High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules 2011 and Section 66A and (B) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria
1999 as amended.
Justice Haruna earlier said that the plaintiff sought the determination of the court in the following issues; whether by the extant provision of the Taraba State upgradement of Traditional Rulers and the creation of Districts Amendment (Orders) 2018 siqned and issued by the Executive
Governor of Taraba State on the 22nd day of February, 2018, Kwararafa and Yaku-Shamaki are not the only district with their
respective headquarters at Kwararafa and Yaku Shamaki.
“Whether from the Extant Provision of the Taraba State
upgradement of Traditional Rulers and the creation of Districts
Amendment (Orders) 2018 signed and issued by the Executive
Governor of Taraba State on the 22nd day of FebruarY, 2018
more particularly in. schedule 1 thereof the following villages (a)
Tella (b) Sabon Gida (c) Disol (d) Doubeli (e) Takai (f) Bolawa (g)
Nanguru (h) Sarkin Noma. (i) Garin Baba (j) Bagole (k) Wurno (l)
Yaku Magaii (m) Yaku Baba (n) Garin Jingi (o) Funawo and (p)
Dadin Kowa are not excluded from the territorial areas of the Kwararafa Chiefdom.
” 2nd Defendant should provide answers to issues No, I and 2 and if are answered in the
affirmative that is to say that Kwararafa and Yaku Shamaki are
the only districts under the territorial jurisdiction of the
Kwararafa Chiefdom Council and that villages like (a) Tella (b)
Sabon Gida (c) Disol (d) Doubeli (e) Takai (f) Bolawa (g) Nanquru
(h) Sarkin Noma (i) Garin Baba () Bagole (k) Wurno (1) Yaku
Magaji (m) Yaku Baba (n) Garin Jingi (o) Funawo and (p) Dadin
Kowa are outside the territorial jurisdiction of the 1st
Defendant, can the 2nd Defendant as the 3rd Class Chief of the 1st Defendant exercise control over (a)
Disol (d) Doubeli (e) Takai (f) Bolawa (a)
(0 Garin Baba (i) Bagole (k) Wurno () Yaku Maqaji (m) Yaku Baba
(n) Garin Jingi (o) Funawo and (p) Dadin Kowa villages?.
Tella (b) Sabon Gida (c)
Nanquru (h) Sarkin Noma.
Mr Joseph Agbu, Counsel to the Defendants described the judgment as an erudite judgement.
Agbu recalled that the plaintiff, if had done the needful, the parties might have settled their matter amicably.
He commended the court for it’s wisdom in dismissing the suit on the ground of non issuance of pre action notice.
Alhaji Mukaila Mansur, one of the plaintiff said that the community would study the judgment before taking the next step.
By
By
