The case of the Plaintiffs/Appellants is simply that they represent the people of Akpawfu Community, in Nkanu Local Government Area, excluding the Defendants/Respondents in the action; that both parties to the action descend from a common progenitor named Oyiwode who originally acquired the pieces of land now in dispute when they were virgin, which lands, after his demise have been owned and enjoyed in common with the Defendants; that the parties jointly built and own a Maternity home, Elementary School and a Cassava farm on the lands in dispute. It is also the case of the Appellants that the parties also defended an inter tribal boundary dispute jointly against a neighouring town of Obunaw Akpugo when the latter sued Akpawfu for the determination of their common boundary i.e. between Obunaw Akpugo and Akpawfu communities which dispute was resolved by Mr. Hill, the then Assistant District Officer in favour of the Akpawfu community, which decision was confirmed by the Chief Commissioner, Eastern Provinces: that the demarcation of the boundary subsequently resulted in a suit by the said Obunaw Akpugo community against Ivurube Nwa Nnamni and 53 others in their personal capacities for allegedly straying across the said boundary in the Native Court Suit No.11/52, which case was lost by the people of Obunaw Akpugo. The Appellants also stated that both parties enjoyed the piece of land in common until 1987 when the Respondents destroyed their farms therein.

On the other hand, it is the case of the Defendants/Respondents that they do not share a common ancestor with the Appellants and they denied being sued jointly with the Appellants in Suit No.11/52, in a representative capacity. The Respondents maintained that the Appellants were immigrants from diverse places who were described as "Awbias" in local dialect and who constituted themselves into a community called "Umnodenigbo" and paid rents to the Respondents for living and farming on the parcels of land now in dispute until 1987 when they refused to do so. The Respondents did not counter-claim against the Appellants.

As stated earlier in this judgment, at the conclusion of the trial, the learned trial Judge found in favour of the Plaintiffs/Appellants and granted the reliefs, earlier reproduced.

The Respondents were dissatisfied with the decision and consequently appealed to the Court of Appeal holden at Enugu in appeal No.CA/E/19/1997 which Court reversed the decision of the trial Court resulting in the instant appeal to this Court.