Respondents sued the appellants for declaration of title to land. The Court found respondents evidence of tradition not proved and rejected their evidence as to acts of possession and ownership.

Furthermore, the court preferred the traditional evidence of the defendants/appellants and found for the defendants/appellants as per the averments in their statements of defence.

Respondents Appealed to the Court of Appeal which found that on the evidence, the trial Judge was right in the conclusions to which he came, there was however, a point in which their Lordships in the Court of Appeal were in doubt and that was as to whether the trial court rightly rejected the evidence of one of the plaintiffs witnesses. They therefore ordered a retrial of the suit.

Appellants then appealed to the Supreme Court.