AMA NIMO BOATEMAA v. NANA BOATENG
March 26, 2019
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
- F. G. KORBIEH, JA (PRESIDING)
- M. M. AGYEMANG (MRS.), JA
- M. A. WOOD (MRS.), JA
Areas of Law
- Property and Real Estate Law
- Evidence Law
- Civil Procedure
March 26, 2019
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
This Court of Appeal decision arises from a land dispute in Koforidua. The original plaintiff, later substituted by her daughter Yaa Serwaa, sought a declaration of title to land at Densu Sector 11, damages for palm trees felled, and an injunction. She claimed title through a gift from her uncle, tracing ownership to her grandfather, Okyeame Adu, and alleged long occupation. The defendant, representing the Kyidom family and Kyidom stool, asserted family ownership and that the plaintiff and her forbears occupied under a bare licence granted by Chief Nana Poku Sarkodie; several witnesses supported this. The High Court dismissed the plaintiff’s suit, finding her evidence nebulous and inconsistent, and credited the defendant’s traditional evidence. On appeal on the omnibus ground that the judgment was against the weight of the evidence and seeking a retrial, the appellate court, applying the Evidence Act and appellate standards, upheld the trial court’s findings, found Exhibit B corroborative, rejected complaints about the judge’s conduct, and dismissed the appeal, awarding GH¢5,000 costs to the respondent.
AGYEMANG (MRS.), JA:
In this appeal against the judgment of the High Court, Koforidua the appellant’s main complaint, set out as the sole ground of appeal, is that the judgment is against the weight of the evidence led.
These are the matters that have given rise to the instant appeal.
The original plaintiff (now deceased and substituted in this appeal as the appellant), commenced an action against the defendant herein (also deceased and substituted in this appeal as the respondent), and one other (deceased and not involved in the instant appeal), seeking inter alia, a declaration of title to a parcel of land, the sum of Ȼ1,400,000 being special damages for twenty palm trees felled by the second defendant, and a perpetual injunction restraining the defendants and their privies from in any manner, trespassing onto the plaintiff’s land.
It was the plaintiff’s case in pleading, that the land in dispute described as: lying at Densu Sector 11, Block K Koforidua, and bounded on all sides by the properties of Akua Adai, Kofi Bimpong, Akua Manu and Nana Dabrehene, measuring 5.44 acres more or less, was gifted to her by one of her uncles: Kwadwo Amankwah. The land which she alleged was originally owned by her grandfather Okyeame Adu allegedly became hers in this manner: Okyeame Adu allegedly gave same to his two sons Kwadwo Amankwah, and Kwame Opoku. Upon the death of Kwame Opoku, his brother Kwadwo Amankwah allegedly gifted the portion worked on by the deceased Kwame Opoku, to the plaintiff.
According to the plaintiff, she went on the land worked there with her daughter who was twelve years old at the time, for about sixty years.
It was the plaintiff’s pleading that her daughter asked one Kumah to find a farm labourer for them, and that Kumah’s own son whom he gave to them as their farm labourer, worked for them, sharing the proceeds of the farm until the said son complained to the plaintiff that Kumah had felled twenty-eight palm trees. The plaintiff further pleaded that it was following her complaint to the Police regarding Kumah’s conduct that the first defendant laid claim to the land. Kumah (now deceased) was sued as the second defendant.
The plaintiff who in her pleading, alleged the boundaries of the land she claimed to be: bounded on all sides by the properties of Akua Adai, Kofi Bimpong, Akua Manu and Nana Dabrehene, gave her boundaries of the land in dispute during cross-examination as: as bounded by Juabenhene, Maame Sika Tena, Kwame Duku and Aboa