Judul : Agric college refutes S'Court land judgment, says case pending
link : Agric college refutes S'Court land judgment, says case pending
Agric college refutes S'Court land judgment, says case pending
The Federal College of Agriculture, Akure, Ondo State, on Monday refuted a purported judgment of the Supreme Court which reportedly favoured a family in Akure – the Ogunmokun Family.
It was earlier reported in the media that the apex court, in a judgment delivered by Justices Uwani Aji, Ibrahim M. Musa Saulawa, Emmanuel Agim, Chidiebere Nwaoma, and Abubakar Umar, had ordered that part of the land being occupied by the college belonged to the Ogunmokun Family.
The family had earlier won the ownership of the land at both the Ondo State High Court and the Court of Appeal.
Speaking on the matter, the provost of the Federal Government-owned agricultural institution, Dr Albert Fadiyimu, said there was no judgment of the Supreme Court yet which ordered the family to take over the college’s land.
Fadiyimu clarified that the report that the family had been ordered by the apex court to take over the land was erroneous and untrue, explaining that the matter was still pending at the court.
The provost, however, confirmed that the institution lost the land ownership case between the school and the Ogunmokun Family at the Ondo State High Court and the Court of Appeal, but insisted that the Supreme Court was yet to deliver a final judgment on the case.
He said, “We wish to place on record that contrary to the misinformation being peddled by the opposing party, the land dispute is far from being concluded. The matter is presently before the Supreme Court. Although the earlier appeal filed at the Supreme Court was struck out on procedural grounds, our legal team has since filed a formal application for leave to appeal, accompanied by the Proposed Notice of Appeal.
“The application is valid, competent, and has been duly entered and is awaiting hearing. We are confident that justice will ultimately be served through the due process of the law. Let it be abundantly clear: the Supreme Court is now seized of the matter, and no party has the lawful authority or moral justification to take unilateral actions or make provocative statements capable of misleading the public and destabilising peace.
“We are also compelled to correct a fundamental misconception which the opposing party is deliberately exploiting, the misunderstanding of the legal implications of a matter being struck out by the Supreme Court. A final judgment of the Supreme Court is one that conclusively determines the rights of the parties after hearing arguments from both sides, leading to a considered decision on the merits of the case.
“In such a situation, the matter is completely decided, and there is nothing more left for the court to entertain on the issues in dispute. However, in our case, no such final judgment was delivered. The earlier appeal was struck out on technical or procedural grounds — not because the Supreme Court examined the substance of the matter or resolved the issues raised in the appeal. The striking out merely means that, due to a procedural defect, the appeal could not proceed at that time. It is not a decision on the merit or a declaration of victory for either party.”
The FECA boss warned the people against having any deal on the land pending the final determination of the apex court on the matter.
“No person should buy, lease, or otherwise transact over the disputed land pending the final resolution of the matter by the apex court. We are watching and will not hesitate to initiate contempt proceedings or take other lawful measures to protect our rights and the sanctity of the judicial process,” Fadiyimu warned.
Provided by SyndiGate Media Inc. (Syndigate.info).Demikianlah Artikel Agric college refutes S'Court land judgment, says case pending
Anda sekarang membaca artikel Agric college refutes S'Court land judgment, says case pending dengan alamat link https://www.punyakamu.com/2025/07/agric-college-refutes-scourt-land.html
0 Response to "Agric college refutes S'Court land judgment, says case pending"
Post a Comment