OLLENNU J.: This is an appeal from a judgment of the Buem-Krachi Native Appeal Court, which upheld a decision of the Buem Native Court “B” given in favour of the plaintiff, but varied an order made by the Native Court “B” for the payment of an amount of £24 10s. Od. to the 3rd defendant.
The main issues in the case are whether the farm in dispute is the property of the plaintiff, and whether the purported sale thereof by the 1st defendant to the 3rd defendant was lawful. These two issues were resolved in favour of the plaintiff by both the native trial-Court and the Native Appeal Court. Counsel for the 3rd defendant has not sought to challenge those two concurrent findings of fact, and their legal consequences.
In this Court it has been urged on behalf of the 3rd defendant that he is entitled to be reimbursed the expenses which he had incurred on improving the farm during the 16 years that it had been in his possession as a result of the wrongful sale to him, and that this Court in the …