The first appellant and the respondent are siblings whom were initially registered as tenants in common, on a land plot.  In 2002, the proprietorship of this land was transferred from the names of the siblings to the 2nd to 8th appellants (who were at the time minor children of the first appellant). 

The respondent was aggrieved by the transfer and registration of the appellant's descendants to the suit property. She contended that the first appellant had acted fraudulently in this transfer. She went to the High Court seeking reinstatement of her name on the suit title. The High Court granted the orders sought. 

The appellants appeal the decision of the High Court. On the grounds that (1) the court erred in evaluating the evidence of the first appellant as a whole, nor recording of his evidence and (2) the respondent freely relinquished her interests in the property. 

The respondent filed a cross appeal declaring that she is entitled to award of mesne profits and or general damages as well. 

This court found that the transfer form did not amount to forgery or fraud. The appeal therefore succeeded in part. However, it was found that the respondent had not fulfilled the condition of transferring and subdividing part of lands into the names of the respondent - as they agreed. 

The respondent was found to have carried out her part of the bargain and the first respondent must do his own as well.