<p style="text-align: justify;"><strong>OLLENNU J.</strong>: (His lordship dealt with, and dismissed, a preliminary objection to the appeal, and continued:--)</p><p style="text-align: justify;">Now the issue which was tried by the Native Court involved: (1) a question of fact, and (2) a question of law, i.e. native custom.</p><p style="text-align: justify;">The plaintiff claimed title to the land on the grounds that it was granted to his ancestor many years ago, that the latter and his successors up to date had been in undisturbed possession of the land, exercising full acts of ownership, including the felling of palm trees.</p><p style="text-align: justify;">In support of his case the plaintiff led evidence that, in addition to their possession and occupation, his family had successfully resisted any attempt made by the co-defendant, the Chief of Kpandu, and other persons, to interfere with their ownership, possession and occupation of the land. One such resistance evidenced was that, while the plaintiff was away from home, the co-defendant’s stool purported to grant a portion of the land to the Evangelical Presbyterian Church, but as so…</p>