ESSIEM JA.
This is an appeal from the judgment of Lutterodt J, by which she upheld the respondent’s claim. The claim was for (a) declaration of title (b) recovery of possession (c) perpetual injunction (d) damages for trespass. The respondent based her claim on a customary grant by the Sempe stool of the land in dispute.
The evidence on record shows that the respondent obtained the land in dispute by customary grant from the Sempe Stool in the 1960s. She started developing the land after obtaining building permit No 1347/75. Her case is that the appellant entered the land and without her consent continued to develop the land even after she had made it plain to him that the land was hers and had refused to sell it to him. There is evidence on record that the appellant and PW3 approached the respondent to negotiate with her to sell the land to him but the respondent refused. In spite of this the appellant went ahead and put up a building on the land.
The evidence shows that the respondent …