of rent, the other person becomes entitled to the land… The time commences to run against the landlord either at the determination of the tenancy-at-will or at the end of one year from its commencement, whichever first happens…” The decision in this case would have been different had she been a wife not a concubine to the deceased. Thus, in Nezianya v. Okagbue (1963) 1 All NLR 352, the property in dispute was acquired by a man who had one daughter from his wife. Upon his death the widow built on some parts of the property and collected rent from tenants. The daughter predeceased her mother but she already had two daughters before her death. The widow devised the property to her two granddaughters who are the plaintiffs in this suit. The defendants, the relations to the original land owner, claimed that the widow had only occupational right with no interest to devise to her granddaughters. The plaintiff relied on long possession but failed and the widow‟s possession was not adverse to the defendants‟ interest, nor were the plaintiffs‟. Upon the evidence of native law, Ademola CJN expressed thus: “The essence of possession of the wife in such a case is that she occupies the property or deals with it as a recognized member of her husband’s family and not as a stranger; nor does she need express consent or permission of the family to occupy the property so long as the family make no objection to her occupation. From the evidence… it is abundantly clear that a married woman, after the death of her husband, can never under native law and custom be a stranger to her deceased husband’s property; and she could not, at any time, acquire a distinct possession of her own to oust the family’s right of ownership over the property. The Onitsha native law and custom postulates