The plaintiff, Mr. Erastus Obioha sued the defendant, Mr. Iyibo Kio Dafe in the Port Harcourt High Court. The plaintiff's claim against the defendant was for:

After due hearing on the evidence before him the learned trial Judge, Niki Tobi, J. as he then was, dismissed the plaintiff's claims in his judgement delivered on the 10th day of March, 1988. The plaintiff appealed to this court against the said judgment.

After hearing evidence and addresses of counsel, the learned trial Judge, (Desalu, J.) dismissed all the three arms of the claim in their entirety.

There is no dispute as to the identity of the property. The dispute arose as to which of the parties had a better title to the property in question. The property in dispute is Plot C, Block 201 otherwise called No.6 Ibadan Street, Port Harcourt.

The plaintiff claimed as per his statement of claim that he was the owner in possession of the property in dispute by virtue of an indenture dated 1/11/54 and registered as No. 49 at page 49 in Volume 115 of the Land Registry formerly at Enugu but now Land Registry, Port Harcourt. The plaintiff contended that he was in peaceable possession of the property until the outbreak of the Nigerian Civil War. The said property became an abandoned property and was administered as such. After the civil war the property was released to him by the Abandoned Property Authority on 12/5/73 by virtue of an Instrument of Transfer, Exhibit 'D' in these proceedings and the Rivers State Official Gazette No.56 Volume 4 of 1974. Following the release of the property to him, the plaintiff said he took possession and exercised maximum acts of ownership and paid annual rates in respect thereof.

However, on the 1st day June, 1981, the defendant was first seen on the property. Thereafter he paid constant visits to the property until August, 1982 when he pasted a notice on the wall of the property describing himself as the landlord of the property and invited the tenants thereon to see him. The defendant continued to threaten and harass the tenants as a result of which the tenants refused to pay further rents to the plaintiff.

In September, 1982 the defendant entered the premises and broke open the doors of a room and a shop and occupied the same without the leave or licence of the plaintiff. In addition the defendant physically prevented one of the plaintiff's new tenants (P.W.2) from occupying a room let to her. In November of the same year the defendant caused the Port Harcourt City Council to write to the tenants in the property. It was in the fact of these continued acts of trespass by the defendant that the plaintiff was completed to institute the action now the subject matter of this appeal.

The learned trial Judge dismissed appellants case. Whereupon the appellant appealed to the Court of Appeal.