In her statement of claim the plaintiff asserted that she was seised in fee simple absolute in possession of the land in dispute, namely, plot 26 in Adewale Family Approved Layout, which was conveyed to her by that family by a Deed of Conveyance dated 10th February 1970 made between her of the one part and Mrs. Patience Adesola Dawodu and Mrs. Stella A. Akintoye of the other part. She was put into possession of the land immediately the land was sold to her and she has since been in continuous and undisturbed pos¬session of the land from that date. She cleared the land and hoisted a notice board there exhibiting her name and address as the owner of the land.

Without her permission, she asserted, the defendant in the month of March 1971 entered the land and commenced building operations on the land in spite of her protest. She reported the matter to the Pedro Police Station. Shomolu. The Police sent for the defendant but the defendant failed to turn-up. One Shakiru Olaleye turned up before the Police with a conveyance, which he said, was the one with which he sold the land to the defendant. She looked for the whereabouts of the defendant but could not find him. Plot 26 was, she said, part of the Adewale Fam-ily Approved Layout made about the 23rd day of June 1967.

The children of Adewale, she said, inherited the land from their father, one Moses Enimo Adewale, who bought the whole land and made out the layout on 21st August, 1929 and who was in undisturbed and continuous possession of the layout until his death intestate on 21st August, 1941.

By reason of the defendant's act of trespass on the land, she said, she was unable to erect her own house on the land as planned.

The defendant controverted the claims of the plaintiff in his statement of defence in which he averted that the land in dispute was part of a larger track of land orig-inally belonging to the Oloto Chieftaincy Family which was sold and conveyed to one Rufai Akinhanmi Olaleye and registered as No. 23 at page 23 in volume 293 of the Land Registry in the office at Ibadan later transferred to Lagos by virtue of a deed of conveyance dated the 4th day of March 1959. The defendant's vendors, namely, Musiliu R. A. Olaleye Shabaru and Bashiru R.A Olaleye informed him, and he verily believed, that the said Rufai Akinhanmi Olaleye, was put into possession immediately after the execution of the deed of conveyance dated 4th March, 1959 and he remained in possession, exercising all acts and rights of ownership over the land. While he was still in possession, he asserted, the said Rufai Akinhanmi Olaleye died intestate on 16th January, 1966 leaving the vendors and other children as beneficiaries of the estate. On 30th May, 1974 Letters of Administration were granted to the vendors by the High Court of Lagos State to administer the estate of the said Rufai Akinhanmi Olaleye. By virtue of a deed of conveyance dated 30th day of December, 1976 registered as No. 53 at page 53 in volume 1599 of the Lands Registry in the Office at Lagos, he said, the land in dispute was sold and conveyed to him (the defendant) by Musiliu, Shakiru, and Bashiru who were Trustees and Administrators of the estate of the said Rufai Akinhanmi Olaleye in fee simple absolute in possession free from all encumbrances and incidents of native tenure.

The defendant asserted that he entered into possession of the plot of land in dispute since December 1976 and had been exercising all acts of ownership and/or possession on the land without let or hindrance. As part of the exercise by him of the acts of ownership, he erected a storey building on the land in dispute and lives in the said storey building with his wife and children and even lets some of the apartments to tenants.

The defendant asserted that, in the premises, the Court should find that he was the owner of the land and dismiss the plaintiff's case as speculative, vexatious and an abuse of the process of the Court.

The trial judge granted all the reliefs sought by the respondent, and the appellant unsuccessfully appealed to the Court of Appeal. He further appealed to the Supreme Court