AKUA ABREFI v. OSEI KWAKU AND YAW EMMANUEL

On the 18th of May, 2022 Plaintiff commenced this action against Defendants seeking the following reliefs:

1. Declaration of title and recovery of possession of all that piece or parcel of farm land situate, lying at “Ebuabowo” on Akim Chia stool lands measuring seven (7) acres more or less bounded on all sides by the properties of Akosua Bonsah, Mr. Koomson and Abena Ntiamoah.

2. Damages of GHc10,000 for cutting Plaintiff’s cocoa trees on the said land.

3. Perpetual injunction restraining Defendants, their assigns, privies, workmen, etc. from having anything to do with the said land mentioned supra.

4. Costs.

The summary of the subject matter of claim are that:

1. Plaintiff is a farmer and the great granddaughter of Abrewa Oforiwaa who acquired the disputed land at Akim Chia.

2. Defendants are family members and also farmers, resident at Akim Chia.

3. Plaintiff says she has the consent and concurrence of other siblings to initiate this action.

4. Plaintiff says the said land mentioned supra was acquired by Plaintiff’s grandmother Abrewa Oforiwaa and that currently, Opanin Yaw Gyimah (Plaintiff’s uncle) is the successor.

5. Plaintiff says Defendants has forcefully taken, cleared and cut down cocoa trees on the land without the consent of Plaintiff and her siblings.

6. Plaintiff says she summoned Defendants before the chief of Chia.

7. Plaintiff says that all efforts made to stop Defendants had proved futile.

8. Plaintiff says that Defendants are still on the land and prays for an injunction to restrain Defendants until the final determination of the suit and also prays for damages for trespass.

9. Wherefore Plaintiff sues Defendants jointly and severally as per her reliefs sought and endorsed on the writ of summons.

Defendants filed their statement of defence on the 29th of June, 2022 saying that they jointly and severally deny every material allegation of Plaintiff’s statement of claim as if same were set out in extensor and denied seriatim.

1. Paragraphs 1 and 4 are partly admitted in that Plaintiff is a farmer, but the disputed land was not first cultivated by Abrewa Oforiwaa as alleged by Plaintiff.

2. Paragraph 2 of the subject matter of claim is admitted.

3. Paragraph 3 cannot be admitted or denied.

4. Paragraph 4 is partly admitted in that the disputed land was cultivated by Nana Asare Dua in its original state and not Abrewa Oforiwaa. Nana Yaw Gyimah also known as Yaw Pagne is a maternal uncle of Plaintiff.

5.