that when judgment is obtained against the charlatan, the improver who has erected a bungalow on the land should be given an opportunity to regularize his holding. The improver who had acted in ignorance was permitted to purchase the freehold. In Aileru v. Ademuoye (1967) NSCR 270; [1967] 1 All NLR 271, the defendant bought a parcel of land from a member of the plaintiff‟s community and proceeded to erect building on it. The plaintiff knew that the defendant was building on the land in the belief that it was his and did nothing to warn him. The Supreme Court did not declare the defendant the owner of the land by virtue of the extinction of plaintiff‟s interest through proprietary estoppel. Rather it adjourned the appeal to enable plaintiff consider the possibility of compensating the defendant for the expenses he has incurred, or the defendant paying the plaintiffs so as to obtain a conveyance of the land from them. In Ibenwelu v. Lawal (1971) NSCC 24, the defendant trespassed on the plaintiff‟s land unintentionally and completed a building on the land before he was informed that he was a trespasser on the land. Rather than restrain the defendant, the court got a surveyor to demarcate the portion of the plaintiff‟s land that the defendant needed to keep his building, an in lieu of an injunction, the plaintiff was awarded the pricely sum of 150 pounds (£150) as damages against the defendant and as compensation for the plaintiff in respect of the area demarcated for the defendant. In Komi v. Isiba (1979) 10-12 CCHCJ 46, the defendant bought property in the plaintiff‟s possession, demolished his uncompleted bungalow on it and erected a block of six-flat on it. The court awarded the sum of ₦26,000 damages in lieu of injunction as defendant had already erected a