Following the demise of Oba Mustapha Olawoore as the traditional ruler of Offa, Offa local government of Kwara State, controversy has continued to visit the appointment of Oba Mufutau Gbadamosi as the successor to the throne.

An Ilorin High Court, the Kwara State capital, confirmed Oba Mufutau's appointment as the most qualified candidate to become the Olofa of offa, establishing the fact that there exist two ruling houses of Anilelerin and Olugbense in the community.

The Olugbense house in 2010, following the installation of Oba Gbadamosi who hailed from Anilelerin, approached the court to declare the appointment of the monarch null and void.

The claimant, Alhaji Raufu Keji had through his counsel; John Baiyeshea, SAN, described the selection, appointment and recognition of the Oba Gbadamosi by the kingmakers as wrongful, null and void.

He added that the kingmakers relied on false historical evidence to deny the claimant's inalienable right to the stool.

He however urged the court to discountenance the defendants' claim that Olugbense ruling house was extinct and disinherited, adding that the ascendancy to the Olofa of Offa was rotational between the two ruling houses.

"The enthronement of Oba Gbadamosi by the kingmakers is wrongful, illogical, null and void and of no effect whatsoever in view of the established chieftaincy system in Offa.

"The Anilelerin house having produced the immediate past Olofa, in the spirit of rotation, fair play and equity, it is the turn of Olugbense ruling house", he claimed.

Meanwhile, defendants' counsel, Lawal Rabana, SAN, urged the court to dismiss all the declaratory reliefs sought by the claimant for lack of merit.

Rabana noted that "None of the evidence and exhibits in witness before the court alluded to the fact that ascension to the Olofa stool is rotational between the two contending ruling houses.

The senior lawyer also described the claimant's allusion to justice and fair play as tantamount to whipping up sentiment to support his claim, adding that Kwara State government's gazette of 1970 on the Olofa's stool only recognises the existence of two ruling house, but does not make reference to rotational policy.

In his over eight hours judgment, Justice Suleiman Akanbi said that all the available evidence before the court indicated that there was no rotation of Olofa stool between the two ruling houses.

He added that the claimants did not give cogent reasons to support the rotational policy, noting that they, claimants, have come under the guise of equity and fair play.