Facts:

A land lying and being at Adaha Ata Street in Use Offot, Uyo, Akwa Ibom State, which originally belonged to late Nde Akpaibo was under dispute by the appellant and respondent.

The appellant alleged that he purchased it, under native law and custom, in 1976 for the sum of N6,000.00, from one Joseph Effiong Edem who inherited it from his late father, Nde Akpaibo, on his demise. The transaction was reduced into writing. On purchase, the appellant took possession by cultivating the land and planting economic trees thereon without let or hindrance. In 2003, the respondent unlawfully entered into the land, destroyed the crops and economic trees planted on it.

In 2005, the Use Offot Village Council, at the instance of the respondent, arbitrated over the dispute and found in the appellant’s favour. The respondent made other attempts to claim it before the same Council and District Court, Offot, but failed. Consequently, he instituted an action against the respondent on 11th November, 2008 at the trial court, wherein he claimed inter alia that he was the owner of the land in dispute and thus entitled to a statutory right of occupancy over same as well as damages and an order of perpetual injunction against the respondent.

However, the respondent joined issue with the appellant and denied liability. He further claimed that the land in dispute was a patrimony from his late father which was under the management of the appellant’s vendor’s father his late uncle. The Eniong Offot Village Council arbitrated over the dispute and ruled in the respondent’s favour.

Consequently the respondent counter-claimed and solicited for reliefs from the court to include a declaration that he was entitled to deemed statutory right of occupancy as well as damages for trespass against the appellant and an order of perpetual injunction against the appellant.

At the close of evidence however the trial court refused the appellant’s claim, but granted the respondent’s counter-claim. Consequently, the respondent filed the instant appeal following his dissatisfaction with the trial court’s judgement.