The case of the plaintiffs as disclosed in their statement of claim and evidence before the court was that the land in dispute was granted to their ancestor Lejin, absolutely by the Aseyin, Olugbile of Iseyin on the arrival of Lejin at Iseyin from Oshogbo. Plaintiffs, who are the descendants of Lejin have always occupied this land by living and farming on it. They granted a portion of this vast land so allocated to them to Olugbemi the ancestor of the defendants when he arrived Iseyin. It is their case that the land in dispute is not part of the portion of the land their an¬cestor Lejin granted to Olugbemi the ancestor of the defendants. Plaintiffs in their statement of claim pleaded and also stated in evidence in court at the trial that un¬known to and without the consent or approval of the head of plaintiffs' family a member of the family instituted an action in suit No.481/67 against the defendant's family in the Iseyin Grade "C" Customary Court in 1967. Judgment was given in favour of the defendant family. An appeal to the Oyo Grade A Customary Court in suit No.15/70 against the judgment was dismissed. The land in dispute is claimed by plaintiffs to be in Lejin's compound, Isale Ladogan, Iseyin. According to their case it was Olugbile, the Aseyin of Iseyin at the time who granted all the land in Isale Ladogan to Ladigbolu Aiyelara, the Bale of Ladogan and it was Ladigbolu Aiyelara who in compliance with Aseyin Olugbile's instruction who granted the area occupied by Lejin including the disputed portion to him. They claimed to have exercised acts of ownership by farming on the land. They have been in exclusive possession and have been responsible to the health authorities for the sanitation of the area. They also claim to have their Orishala shrine on the land. They had planted 'Odan' and Sekeseke trees on the land in dispute.

The defendants denied the averments of the plaintiffs, and went on to state in their statement of defence their root of title. They denied that their ancestor Olugbe¬mi derived his title to the land which he occupied and where the defendants are from Lejin plaintiff's ancestor. Their case is that their ancestor Olugbemi had an absolute grant of the land he occupied at Ladogan Quarters including the disputed portion from Aseyin Olugbile, through Bale Jinadu. They claim that the earth drain is their boundary with the plaintiffs. Defendants claim to have exercised uninter¬rupted acts of ownership in respect of the land by the erection of dwelling houses, corn mill shops, and granting leases to persons. The defendants pleaded and re¬lied upon judgments given in their favour in an action between a member of the plaintiffs' family and the defendants. The question in dispute in respect of which issue was joined is the ownership of a piece of land verged yellow and marked A & B on plan No.LL8017 tendered as Exhibit B in the trial. It is fairly clear from the pleadings and evidence in support that both parties trace their root of title to the Aseyin of Iseyin, Oba Olugbile. Whereas plaintiffs claim that it was Bale Aiyela¬ra who gave the land including the portion in dispute and that it was they who granted the land occupied by defendants minus the portion in dispute. Defend¬ants claim to have derived their title from a grant from Oba Olugbile, the Aseyin of Iseyin through Bale Jinadu who was the Bale Ladogan at the time. The grant in¬cluded the portion in dispute. It is obvious from the case of the parties that they both claim to have derived title from the same root. The burden is clearly on the plaintiffs who claim that defendants derived their title from them to establish that fact.

Plaintiffs admitted in their statement of claim and in evidence before the trial Judge that judgment was given against a member of their family in an action claim-ing a declaration of title in respect of the portion in dispute. The contention was that the action was without the consent and authority of the head of the plaintiffs' family. Counsel for the plaintiff tendered the judgments both in the court of first instance and on appeal and contended that the judgments were void and could not sustain the plea of res judicata.

After a careful consideration and evaluation of the evidence before him, the learned trial judge dismissed the claim of the plaintiffs/appellants.

The plaintiffs appealed to the Court of Appeal which dismissed the appeal, whereupon the plaintiffs further appealed to the Supreme Court.