The plaintiffs' case is that Ohia Ibekwe land was originally a juju forest which housed the Ibekwe rain juju. Part of the forest was cleared by the first known chief rain-making juju priest of the plaintiffs' family. The traditional founder of Ohia Ibekwe forest land was one Okwaraku. He performed maximum acts of ownership and possession thereon by way of farming the land and ministering on to the said rain juju. On his death, his three sons, namely, Iheakongaonome, Nwaire and Ewuzie succeeded to all his lands including Ohia Ibekwe juju forest land. Iheakongaonome became the chief priest of Ibekwe juju and took charge of the juju forest. On the death of Iheakongaonome, his eldest son Okwaranyia Ekwere succeeded him. He was himself succeded by his eldest son Chigbue and then Dike the eldest son of Chigbue; and then Okwaebizie the eldest son of Dike; followed by Okwaranyia the eldest son of Okwaebuzie; and finally by the 1st plaintiff the eldest son of Okwaranyia. The plaintiffs gave three instances in which they permitted members of the defendants' family to build on the land in dispute.

The defendants on their part, while denying the plaintiffs' side of the case, admitted that the forest has always been a juju forest housing a juju they also call Ibekwe. They claim, as already said, that two pieces of land are in dispute, namely, one called Ala Ohia Ibekwe and a portion of another called Ala Oforo. They say that the said pieces of land were founded by their ancestor Okohia (founder of Okohia village). They trace the genealogy and the way the land devolved. In addition, the defendants' family members have exploited Indian bamboo and felled economic trees on the land over the years. Also, the chief priesthood of the Ibekwe juju has remained in Duruohome family descending to the lineage of his first son, while the second son's lineage is the rain-maker. The defendants also pleaded and gave evidence that there was arbitration in respect of a dispute over a portion of Aloa Ohia Ibekwe which was in their favour. Finally, they pleaded the ancient trench (Nkoro) as the common boundary between the parties and gave evidence accordingly.

The trial court held that the plaintiffs failed to prove their case and dismissed it.

Plaintiffs appealed to the Court of Appeal and the court allowed the appeal and set aside the judgment of the trial court and ordered a retrial.

This appeal to the Supreme Court by the defendant and a cross appeal by the plaintiff to contest the retrial order.