Tenancy: Court awards N2m to Fawehinmi’s family

- Advertisement -

A High Court sitting in Ondo State has set aside its judgment delivered on March 2, 2017, having been obtained by fraud.

The judge also awarded the sum of N2m against the defendants as general damages suffered by the claimants.

Justice Bolatito Ajibade also set aside the tenancy agreement purported to have been entered by two men, Olatuja Fawehinmi and Samuel Fasimoye, dated August 26, 1958, for being fabricated and for obtaining the judgment of the court in suit No HOD/15/2016, by fraud.

- Advertisement -

Justice Ajibade further set aside the judgement of Justice O.A. Adegbehingbe of the same court with suit No HOD/15/2016 delivered on March 2, 2017.

The claimants in the suit, No HOD/23/2023, are Madam Mogbonjubola Fawehinmi and Madam Mowa Fawehinmi, for themselves and on behalf of Tuja Fawehinmi and High Chief Fawehinmi family of Ondo State.

While the defendants are Michael and Henry Fasimoye for themselves and on behalf of the Fasimoye family of Ondo.

The claimants, in their originating summons dated February 24, 2023, and filed on February 27, 2023, asked the court to determine whether, upon a declaration of Exhibit C, judgment delivered by Justice Bola in suit No AK/35c/2019, between the State vs Michael Fasimoye & anor and the resultant specific finding of the court to the effect that Exhibit P1(P1A) (Tenancy Agreement dated 26/8/1958) relied upon by the defendants on HOD/15/2016, and on which the court found in favour of the present defendants was actually simulated and a product of falsehood.

The claimants demanded N20m against the defendants as general damages.

The originating summons was supported by a 12-paragraph affidavit deposed to by one Olanrewaju Fawehinmi, a member of the claimants’ family, attached with exhibits and a written address dated February 24, 2023.

A sole issue of “whether the court had inherent power to set aside its judgment when obtained by fraud,” was formulated and argued in the written address.

READ ALSO: Court Strikes Out DSS Suit Seeking To Keep Emefiele In Detention

The claimants’ counsel, M. O. Arowojolu, relied on the averments in the supporting affidavit and further affidavit and also adopted the written address in support of the application.

However, the originating summons was opposed by the defendants vide 18 paragraphs counter-affidavit dated and filed on April 13, 2023, deposed to by the second defendant.

The defendants also filed a further counter-affidavit alongside a written address dated and filed on June 2, 2023.

In her judgment, Justice Ajibade held that she had carefully examined the originating summons, the various affidavits and exhibits attached therewith, and all the addresses filed by both sides vis-a-vis the issues.

The judge held, “From all the above stated, I hold that the defendants have failed to prove by their affidavit evidence that Exhibit B1, which is the fulcrum of the claimants’ case, was not forged or the signature of E.M.O. Fawehinmi on it was not stimulated which is part of the grounds upon which the court held in suit NO HOD/ 15/ 2016 as follows, “The Tuja Fawehinmi is a tenant to the (claimants now defendants) ‘family on the land claimed in the claim”( page 46 of the judgment).

“An order is hereby granted setting aside the judgment delivered by this court in HOD/ 15/2016, between Michael Fasimoye and another vs and Madam Mogbonjubola Fawehinmi and others having been obtained by fraud.

“An order of perpetual injunction is hereby granted restraining the defendants, their agents, assigns, privies, or anybody claiming through them from ever presenting exhibit P1 (P 1A) Exhibit (B1, B2 before this court), the tenancy agreement dated August 26, 1958, purported to have been made between Olatuja (Tuja) Fawehinmi and Samuel Fasimoye, before my judicial or administrative body anywhere.

“An order of perpetual injunction is hereby granted, restraining the defendants, their agents assign, privies or anybody claiming through them from ever claiming any interest from HOD/15/2016, same having been set aside.”