“As Appellant submitted, there are different rights of occupancy introduced by the Land Use Act1978 – the statutory right of occupancy granted by the State Government and Customary right of Occupancy granted by the Local Government

– see Provost, L.S.C.E. V. Edun (supra), wherein Iguh, JSC, stated as follows –

There is firstly the statutory right of occupancy granted by a State Governor pursuant to Section 5(1)(a) of the Act and the customary right of occupancy granted by a Local Government under section 6(1)(a) of the Act. The second classification is the statutory right of occupancy deemed to have been granted by a State Governor pursuant to Section 34(2) of the Act as against the customary right of occupancy deemed to have been granted by a Local Government under section 36(2). There, therefore, exist in both cases of statutory and customary rights of occupancy, actual grant as well as deemed grant. An actual grant is naturally a grant expressly made by the Governor of a State or by a Local Government whilst a deemed grant came into existence automatically by the operation of law.

PER A.A.AUGIE, J.S.C in GENERAL COTTON MILL LIMITED VS TRAVELLERS PALACE HOTEL LER [2018]SC. 297/200 https://legalpediaonline.com/general-cotton-mill-limited-vs-travellers-palace-hotel/