The facts of the case as stated by the 2nd Plaintiff is that the 2nd Plaintiff became the Mogaji of Jagun Ibagbe family after the death of the 1st Plaintiff who was the Mogaji of Jagun Ibagbe family who died during the pendency of the proceedings before the trial Court The plaintiffs instituted the action in this appeal for themselves and on behalf of the members of Jagun Ibagbe family, hence their claims as reproduced above. Plaintiffs' claims stemmed from the fact that the 2nd - 6th Defendants purported to lease the land in dispute to the 1st Defendant as their own Ojo family land and not as Jagun Ibagbe family land on the ground that Jagun Ibagbe had partitioned his land among his children during his life time even though Exhibit 'D' admitted in evidence shows that the land in dispute was purported to have been leased to the 1st Defendant as Jagun Ibagbe family land in 1978, when Exhibit ‘D' was made, which contradicted the oral evidence given on partition by the 2nd - 6th Defendants. It is common ground between the parties that the land in dispute from time immemorial was Jagun Ibagbe family land. It is also clear that it is the 2nd - 6th Defendants that are claiming that Jagun Ibagbe family land had been partitioned amongst his children and that because Ojo section farmed on the land, it had therefore, been partitioned to Ojo section. The Defendants, thus, had the onus and the burden of establishing the partition of the land in dispute.

It is the contention of the Plaintiffs that the Jagun Ibagbe family land has never been partitioned and that the 1st Plaintiff being the Mogaji of the family then, did not take part in the alienation of the property to the 1st Defendant, That the 2nd Plaintiff who was shown to be an important and a principal member of the family did not also take part in the alienation and that the lease to the 1st Defendant is therefore, void and or voidable at the instance of the 2nd Plaintiff. The 1st Defendant was shown to have entered the land in dispute and bulldozed it and commenced using the land which is evidence of trespass. Both sides accepted that the ancestor of the 1st Plaintiff, one Ibitokun, was among the three children of Jagun Ibagbe. There is no dispute that Ibitokun family farms at Olopade and that the 1st Plaintiff's ancestor and the 1st Plaintiff had been heads of family at different times. The 2nd Plaintiff claimed that the children of Jagun Ibagbe were:

The 2nd and 3rd Defendants on the other hand, claimed on behalf of other Defendants that the three children of the Jagun Ibagbe were:

The Defendants on their part claimed that the gift of the farmlands was an outright grant that is partition. At the end of the trial, and in a considered judgment delivered by Ige, J., on the 14th December, 1990, the trial Judge preferred the evidence of the Defendants and gave judgment in their favour. Dissatisfied, the Plaintiff appealed to the Court of Appeal, Ibadan Division, which delivered its judgment on the 9th June, 2003, giving judgment in favour of the Plaintiffs by allowing their appeal and setting aside the decision of the trial Court. Dissatisfied the 2nd, 3rd - 6th Defendants appealed to the Supreme Court.