JUDGMENT
LINGLEY J. The first ground on which the judgment of the court below is attacked by the appellants might be termed procedural. There was a claim and a counterclaim filed in the court below. The trial court said it "has no alternative than to enter judgment for the plaintiffs for possession and ownership of the land in dispute." It made an order:
"The first defendant to retain his cocoa farm alleged to have been made by his father and not to make any new farm or cocoa farm."
It is now argued that there should have been specific findings on both claim and counterclaim.
I think, however, that the judgment of the trial court dealt with the issues between the parties in a way that was quite clear and quite adequate.
Secondly, it is argued that the plaintiffs' evidence is purely traditional. I cannot consider it is a weakness of the plaintiffs' case that they base their case on their tradition. As argued by the respondents, there is no evidence of occupation, etc., to support the tradi…