Briefly, the facts in support of the respondent's claim and which from the rec¬ords do not appear to be in dispute are as follows. Just before the Federal troops took over Port Harcourt from the Rebel troops in May, 1968, during the Civil War the respondent began to evacuate his property the subject matter of the claim in the case in hand inclusive from Port Harcourt; just under ten miles from Owerri (now the Capital of Imo State and the situs of the Court of trial) at a village known as Mgbirichi, the lorry conveying the respondent's property from Port Harcourt to his hometown, beyond Owerri broke down and in the interval between the search for motor mechanics and the repair of the said lorry unknown person removed the lorry and its contents from the spot where it had broken down. Apart from the re¬spondent's evidence that neither his lorry nor the driver has since been found, nothing else is known of either the lorry or the driver. Soon after the civil war the Printing Machine was found in possession of the appellant; it was being used for the purpose of his business as a printer and publisher in his business premises at Uyo in the Cross River State (formerly, South Eastern state). On interrogation the appellant who, from the records, knew nothing of the facts leading up to, and the alleged incident at, Mgbirichi explained that the Printing Machine was recovered in Port Harcourt by the Abandoned Property Authority of the Rivers State who later sold the same to him. A report by the respondent was lodged with the Police Auth¬orities at Owerri who, carried out investigations and, subsequently visited the busi¬ness premises of the appellant at Uyo from where they removed the Printing Machine into Owerri with a view to possible criminal court action against the ap¬pellant who had failed to produce to them a satisfactory receipt, of purchase of the same, from the Rivers State Abandoned Property Authority. Later, however, on the advice of the Imo State Ministry of Justice, the Police Authorities declined to take any criminal action in court and advised the respondent to pursue his civil remedies, if he so desired. These proceedings were initiated in the High Court by the respondent on the advice of his solicitor.

At the hearing, the learned trial Judge overruled the objection and contentions on behalf of the appellant that as the High Court of the Rivers State was the proper venue for these proceedings the High Court of the former East Central (now, Imo) state had no jurisdiction to entertain the same.