The respondent as plaintiff complained at the Area Court II malumfashi against the appellant as defendant claiming his late father's farmland in possession of the appellant. The appellant denied the claim and said he bought the piece of land in dispute from Magajin Gari Aliyu, the village head of Malumfashi 37 years ago. The appellant called five witnesses to prove the purchase transaction.

The court afforded the respondent opportunity of calling his own three witnesses. The respondent also tendered a letter written by his elder brother who was living in Katsina to the effect that the appellant was holding the land in dispute in trust for the respondent.

The suit was later transferred from the undefended to the general cause list. Plead¬ings were consequently ordered and settled by the parties. Evidence was ad-duced by both parties whose counsel also addressed the court. Learned trial judge, Kurada, J., in a reserved and

The trial Area Court entered judgment for the appellant on the ground of long possession for 37 years by the appellant without complaint or disturbance by the respondent. The respondent appealed to the Upper Area Court, Malumfashi. The Upper Area Court reheard the case wherein the respondent re stated his complaint and emphasised his case that the appellant was holding the land in dispute in trust in favour of the respondent. The Upper Area Court dismissed the respondent's appeal and affirmed the judgment of the trial Area Court on the ground that the appellant had been in possession for over 10 years and then applied the doctrine of prescription or hauzi. The respondent further appealed to the High Court in its appellate jurisdiction. The High Court found that the appellant held the land in trust for the respondent and that since trust had been established the issue of prescription does not arise; that the principle of prescription does not apply because the land was given to Mogajin to hold in trust for the respondent. The High Court then allowed the appeal and gave judgment to the respondent.

The appellant then appealed to the Court of Appeal Kaduna Division. The Court of Appeal affirmed the decision of the High Court and dismissed the appeal. The appellant, dissatisfied with the Court of Appeal's decision further appealed to the Supreme Court.