Traditional Evidence

It is trite law that in order to establish the traditional history of land relied on as root of title, a plaintiff must plead the names of the founder and those after him upon whom the land devolved to the last successor(s) and also lead evidence in support without leaving gaps of creating mysterious or embarrassing linkages which have not been or can not be explained. In short, the pleadings of devolution and the evidence in support must be reliable and cogent, otherwise the claim for title will fail. SeeEze vs Atasre (2000) 6 SC (Pt.1) 214.

In the case in hand, each side had set up its version of how they came to the land and its ownership and this brings to mind the locus clasisicus guide in the case of Kojo II v. Bonsie & Anor (1957) 1 WLR 1223 at 1226 wherein it was held that:-
"The dispute was all as to the traditional history which had been handed down by word of mouth from their forefathers. In this regard, it must be recognized that in the course of transmission from generation to generation, mistakes may occur without any dishonest motives whatsoever. Witnesses of the utmost veracity may speak honestly but erroneously as to what took place a hundred or more years ago. Where there is a conflict of traditional history, one side or the other must be mistaken, yet but may be honest in their belief. In such a case, demeanour is title guide to the truth. The best way is to test the traditional history by reference to the facts in recent years as established by evidence and seeing which of two competing histories is more probable."

Even then, there was another glaring omission in the case of the plaintiffs/appellants. The rationale of all binding authorities is that it is not sufficient for a party (such as the appellants herein) who relied for proof of title to land on it (traditional evidence) to merely prove that he or his predecessor in title had owned and possessed the land from time immemorial, Akinloye v. Eyiyola (supra): Olujinle v. Adeogbo (supra); Adejumo v. Ayantegbe (supra); Anyanwu v. Mbara (supra): Alli and Anor v. Alesinloye and Ors (supra).
Simply put, they (the plaintiffs/appellants) failed to discharge the burden of proof on the pleadings as required of claimants of title to land through traditional evidence, Akinloye v. Eyiyola (supra); Olujinle v. Adeogbo (sutra); Adejumo v. Ayantegbe (supra); Ayanwu v. Mbara (supra); Alli and Anor v. Alesinloye and Ors (supra).