n
CaseLaw
Appellants (in their personal and representative capacities) sued respondents (in a representative capacity) claiming declaration of title to the land in dispute, damages for trespass and injunction.
Appellants’ had argued that traditionally and by inheritance the land in dispute belongs to them. Part of the land in dispute called Ohia Ibekwe was originally a juju forest, which housed the Ibekwe rain juju. As years went by, the family’s population grew and land became scarce, members of appellant’s family cleared part of the original Ohia Ibekwe land and framed thereon. At about 1952 Mazi Ezete Eke and his relations from respondents’ family came with customary wine seeking a place for his son’s compound. This, the appellants obliged, and Ezete’s son called Francis built his compound thereon.
Appellants’ had argued that traditionally and by inheritance the land in dispute belongs to them. Part of the land in dispute called Ohia Ibekwe was originally a juju forest, which housed the Ibekwe rain juju. As years went by, the family’s population grew and land became scarce, members of appellant’s family cleared part of the original Ohia Ibekwe land and framed thereon. At about 1952 Mazi Ezete Eke and his relations from respondents’ family came with customary wine seeking a place for his son’s compound. This, the appellants obliged, and Ezete’s son called Francis built his compound thereon.
At about January 1985, respondents and others family members took undue advantage and encroached beyond the portion allowed for Francis Ezete’s compound. Appellants in exercise of their right as owners in possession of the said land in protection of their juju forest stopped the trespassory activities. But the trespass continued, hence this suit.
Respondents had argued that the land in dispute belonged to them traditionally and traced their title.
The learned trial Judge dismissed the appellants’ case in its entirety. Dissatisfied, the appellants appealed to the Court of Appeal.