I contributed over N3m to build the house, it belongs to both of us -Woman
A man, Adewola, has instituted an action against his ex-wife, Odunayo, before Grade A Customary Court 2, sitting at Mapo, Ibadan, Oyo State.
He is seeking an order compelling her to vacate his three-bedroom flat, which he claims was his own.
He further urges the court to assist him in recovering possession of the property from Odunayo.
Adewola explained that he and Odunayo were formerly married, but that their marriage was dissolved by a Grade A Customary Court sitting at Mapo, Ibadan, Oyo State, on June 30, 2025.
He tendered the divorce certificate before the court, which was admitted in evidence and marked as Exhibit A.
The plaintiff told the court that following the dissolution of their marriage, he served the defendant with a seven-day notice to quit the apartment, which was dated August 20, 2025.
The notice was admitted in evidence as Exhibit B.
Odunayo pleaded not liable to the claim by the plaintiff.
Odunayo stated that the house is jointly owned by both parties.
She further explained that she contributed more than ?3 million towards the construction of the house.
The defendant asserted that she possessed receipts and other related documents to back her claim.
She further urged the court to order that the property be sold and that the proceeds be shared between both parties.
The case was adjourned to allow the defendant to present her further defence, particularly the receipts she claimed to possess.
However, Odunayo failed to appear on the adjourned date, which made the court discountenance her evidence and adjourn the suit for judgement.
Adewola, in his evidence, said: ‘I built a three-bedroom flat where I live with my family.
‘I brought my ex-wife to court because she is in possession of one of the three rooms in this building.
‘I want the court to help me recover possession of the room from my ex-wife.
‘My marriage to my former wife was dissolved by Grade A Customary Court, sitting at Mapo, Ibadan, Oyo State, on June 30, 2025. Here is the divorce certificate presented to me.
‘I served my ex-wife a seven-day notice dated August 20, 2025, to quit my house, but she refused to comply and remained adamant ( Adewola tendered a copy of the notice, and this was admitted as Exhibit B.
‘Our children can remain in my house, but I want to eject her because she is no longer my wife.’
Odunayo, in her response, told the court: ‘I do not agree with his claim. We both contributed to the construction of the house, so we jointly own it.
‘I contributed over N3,000,000 towards the construction of the house and I have receipts to support my claim, although I did not bring them to court.
‘I do not agree that my husband should take full possession of the house.
‘I want the house to be sold and the proceeds shared between my ex-husband and me.’
The Court President, Mrs. O. E. Owoseni, in delivering her judgement, referred to an earlier decision of the Grade A Customary Court sitting at Mapo, Ibadan, Oyo State, which held that Adewola and Odunayo did not contract a valid marriage and that no bride price was paid.
The court had found that they were merely cohabiting.
Owoseni further held that where the plaintiff sought to evict a woman he had cohabited with for years from the apartment she occupied, the applicable legal requirements for removing a tenant at will must first be satisfied before such a claim could be granted.
She explained that under Sections 7 and 8 of the Recovery of Premises Law of Oyo State, 2000, a tenant at will must be served with a seven-day notice to quit, followed by a seven-day notice of the owner’s intention to recover possession, before any action can be instituted in court.
According to her, failure to serve both notices would render the claim defective.
In this case, Owoseni noted that only the seven-day notice to quit was served on the defendant, who qualified as a tenant at will.
Consequently, she said only one of the two mandatory conditions to evict a tenant was fulfilled, while the other was not.
She held that the failure to satisfy both conditions deprived the court of the jurisdiction to order the defendant to vacate the premises.
Owoseni stated that the claim for recovery of possession failed.