“…Where for instance the plaintiff pleads possession of the land in dispute as his root of title and the defendant admits that possession but adds that the land was given to the plaintiff on pledge, then the onus shifts onto the defendant to prove that the plaintiff is not the owner of the land, his possession of which has been admitted. The defendant then also has the onus of proving the alleged pledge. Once the defendant admits the plaintiffs possession of the land in dispute in his Statement of Defence, there and then, the plaintiff has on the pleadings discharged the onus of proof cast on him and Section 133 (2) of the Evidence Act will impose a burden on the defendant to prove that the plaintiff is not an owner but rather a pledgee. See Lawrence Onyekaonwu & Ors. v Ekwubiri (1966) 1 All NLR 32 at P. 35. If at the close of his case, the said defendant fails to prove that the plaintiff is not an owner but a pledgee, the plaintiffs claim succeeds without the plaintiff giving any further evidence.” Per PETER-ODILI, J.S.C. in EKWEOZOR & ORS v. REG. TRUSTEES OF THE SAVIOURS APOSTOLIC CHURCH OF NIG (LCER-2020-39155-SC) at p. 40 – p. 41