The respondent stated that he was the head of diokpara of Maduagwu family, just as his father, Okereke, who according to him succeeded the eldest deceased son of the Maduagwu family. Egbe jimba to that position. He tendered the survey plan of the land in dispute (see Exhibit A) which the appellant did not counter by filing his own version. He concluded his evidence by asserting that since he succeeded his father as the head of the family, he was entitled as of right, to the land in dispute which is the exclusive right of the incumbent head of the family. PW3, Philip Okereke and PW4, Rufus Okereke both brothers of the respondent gave evidence supporting him to the hilt. PW5, Nze Duru Iheako Anokwute, testified that the Nze na Ozo Ebeitoli Orlu alleged to have arbitrated between the parties did invite the parties for settlement but that the appellant dishonored the invitation. He however admitted under cross examination that Nze na Ozo Ebeitoli is an appellate body.

The appellant testified as DW1, called his mother as DW2 and four more other witnesses in support of his defence. His evidence was briefly that he was the son of Egbejimba Maduagwu even though DW2 was married originally by Anyamele Maduagwu, younger brother of Egbejinba, who predeceased him. That DW2 was inherited by Egbejimba in January, 1940, a year after the death of Anyamele and that the (appellant) was born in December, 1940 as an issue between his mother and Egbejimba who was said to have died later in or around 1943 when appellant was a baby of about 3 years. Appellant further testified about the demise of Egbejimba, the hostility of the respondent’s father towards him and DW2 which led to their flight to DW2’s father’s home at Umuokwara. He gave evidence of how he returned to the Maduagwu family, his performance of rites due to him as diokpara of that family and his recognition as such by the family, the subsequent disagreements between him and the respondents family which culminated in arbitration following which is the instant case.

At the conclusion of evidence on both sides, learned counsel addressed the court, which thereafter proceeded in a reserved judgment delivered on September, 29, 1986 to grant in favour of the respondent, the declaration sought. In addition, it awarded N2,000.00 damages for trespass and perpetual injunction in respondent’s favour. Being dissatisfied with the judgment, the defendant appealed to the Court of Appeal.