ABBEY RAHMAN WAHAB VS BEN TETE BAMFO.
November 21, 2024
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
- ANTHONY OPPONG, JA (PRESIDING)
- CYRA. P. KORANTENG, JA (MRS)
- DR. OWUSU-DAPAAH, JA
Areas of Law
- Property and Real Estate Law
- Evidence Law
- Civil Procedure
November 21, 2024
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
Justice Anthony Oppong, JA, writing for the Court of Appeal, decided a land title dispute in Kokrobite, Accra, where both an appellant and a respondent claimed through the same grantors: the Nii Arde Nkpa family of Plerno and Nii Ofei II of Kokrobite. The High Court had dismissed the appellants claim and upheld the respondents counterclaim, applying nemo dat. On appeal, the court re-evaluated the evidence under the against the weight of evidence ground. It found that the appellant acquired an effective customary grant in January 2003, later formalized by a lease dated 3 August 2003; Exhibit C (a receipt) corroborated this under Evidence Act section 7(1). The respondents contrary evidence, including a 2000 memorandum lacking signatures of the purported authors, was inherently unreliable and did not prove a grant. Applying Brown v Quarshigah and nemo dat, the court held the later 2003 grant to the respondent void, set aside the High Court judgment, declared title for the appellant, ordered recovery and injunctive relief, and awarded GH a210,000 damages for trespass. Two other judges concurred.
ANTHONY OPPONG, JA
This is an appeal against the judgment of the High Court, Land Division, Accra, dated 1st November, 2018. The High Court dismissed the claim of plaintiff/appellant (hereafter to be called simply as appellant) and entered judgment on the counterclaim in favor of the defendant/respondent (also to be hereafter simply called respondent).
Both the appellant and the respondent sought declaration of title to a piece of land situate at Kokrobite-Accra, among other ancillary reliefs. Whilst the appellant described the land size as 0.366 acre, the respondent described the land size as 0.43 acre. Then also both of them claim to have acquired their respective interests in the disputed land from the same source or family, namely, Nii Arde Nkpa family of Plerno and Nii Ofei II of Kokrobite.
The learned trial judge somewhat summed it up in her judgment at page 229 of the ROA by stating that
“the facts of this case are that the plaintiff (appellant) and the defendant (respondent) acquired leases of substantially the same parcel of land located at Kokrobite in the Greater Accra Region, from a common grantor, the Nii Arde Nkpa family of Plerno”
After evaluating the evidence of appellant and his two witnesses, namely Nii Ofei III, the immediate successor of Nii Ofei II as PW1 and Kasim Baba as PW2, and that of the respondent and his two witnesses, Nelson Nukunu as DW1 and Emmanuel Akpe as DW2, the learned trial judge adjudged the respondent as better entitled to the disputed land, relying on the principle of nemo dat quod non habet, having found that respondent acquired the disputed land earlier in time, and made certain consequential orders in favor of the respondent.
The appellant expressed his dissatisfaction of the judgment of the trial court by instituting an appeal with grounds expressive of the usual general contention of most appellants that the judgment of the trial court is against the weight of evidence. I must be quick to observe that the manner and the form the other grounds (ii) and (iii) were couched leave much to be desired and the respondent in his written submissions urged the court to strike them out. However, having looked at them critically and observing that those grounds are substantially complaining about how the trial court evaluated the evidence which makes it conducive to subsume them under the general ground that the judgment is against the weight of evidence, I am minded to determine this appeal on that omnibus ground, vi