July 23, 2024
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
Alpha Beta Edu Centre Ltd appealed from a High Court judgment in consolidated suits FAL/558/2014 and LD/0794/2016 involving Akokorfoto land at South Odorkor/Dansoman, Accra. The High Court had granted only declaration of title while confirming Sempe Stool’s possessory rights, dismissing other reliefs. On rehearing, the Court of Appeal (per P. Bright Mensah JA, with Henry A. Kwofie JSC presiding and Janapare Bartels-Kodwo JA concurring) found that in the earlier Nii Yao Duade Crabbe litigation, Acolatse J dismissed the Sempe Stool’s counterclaim and that the Supreme Court’s affirmance did not grant Sempe possessory rights; rather, quarter stools could claim only areas in their exclusive possession. It relied on Ofoe J’s judgment establishing Akokorfoto within the Gbawe family lands and invalidating Sempe’s ADC lease; Sempe’s appeal was struck out. Fraud allegations against Alpha Beta were unproven beyond reasonable doubt; defendants admitted building despite police warnings, constituting trespass. The Court of Appeal set aside the High Court’s judgment and decreed title and possession to Alpha Beta, granting a perpetual injunction, GHc40,000 damages per defendant, and GHc100,000 costs.
BRIGHT MENSAH JA:
The plaintiff/appellant herein simply referred to as the plaintiff, has launched the instant appeal against the judgment of the High Court, Accra [Land Division] delivered 5th of March, 2021 in consolidated suits numbered LD/0794/16 and FAL/558/14, respectively tried by the said court.
The judgment appears on pp 77-114 of Vol.
4 of the record of appeal [roa]. Apparently dissatisfied with the decision of the lower court, the plaintiff has filed the instant appeal on a number of grounds, namely:
1. The trial judge after affirming that the plaintiff was entitled to a declaration of title to the disputed land erred in not granting the relief of possession.
2. The trial judge erred by holding that the defendants were in possession of the land.
3. The trial judge erred when he dispensed with the compo-site plan which had been drawn to aid the court in arriving at a just judgment.
4. The trial judge erred in holding that the Yao Duade case in which judgment was given in 1963 granted possession of Akokorforto lands to the Sempe stool.
5. That the judgment was against the weight of evidence.
6. Further grounds of appeal will be filed upon receipt of a copy of the record of proceedings.
See: pp 115-117 Vol.
4 [roa]. So far, the plaintiff has never filed further grounds of appeal.
Notice of appeal by defendants: Significantly, we also have on record, a notice of appeal filed by defendants describing themselves as Defendants/Counter Appellants on 24/09/2021 with the leave of the lower court against the judgment of Amo-Yartey J, the same judgment the plaintiff has appealed against, complaining that: 1. The judgment is against the weight of evidence.
2. The learned trial judge erred when he held that Acolatse J’s judgment of 1963 covered the disputed land, and yet stated that the plaintiff was entitled to a declaration of title to the disputed land.
3. The learned trial judge erred, in that after affirming Acolatse J’s judgment of 1963 in the Yao Duade case which granted possession of Akokoforto lands to the Sempe Stool, proceeded to decree title in favour of the plaintiff.
4. The learned trial judge erred by holding that the plaintiff was entitled to a declaration of title to the disputed land.
5. The learned trial judge erred after holding that he does not have the slightest power to deviate from the decision of the Supreme Court per the hierarchy of court as he is bound to follow the decision of the Supreme Court, fai