AMANING ALIAS ANGU v. ANGU II

JUDGMENT OF ABBAN J.A.

The action was commenced in the High Court, Sekondi by one J. W. Essien alias Kwesi Baidu. But before judgment was delivered on 15 December 1963, he had passed away. One Opanyin Armoo joined the suit as a co-defendant. But alas, he suffered the same fate as Essien. Opanyin Armoo, after he had given his evidence, also died. Kojo Korantsin Amaning and Kwamena Benyah were substituted for Essien and Opanyin Armoo, respectively. The nature of the case was such that the trial High Court allowed the substitution of those two persons not because they had the capacity in which they made their respective applications, but they were allowed to come in as nominal parties, so to speak, in order that the action would not become abated. Thus the judgment determined only the rights of the original parties—J. W. Essien, Nana Kobina Angu II, and Opanyin Armoo. In this appeal the expressions “plaintiff” and "co-defendant" have been used in reference to J. W. Essien and Opanyin Armoo, both deceased.

The Kokodo Ebiradzi stool family of Fijai is the family from which chiefs of Fijai are elected. The plaintiff claiming to be the head of that stool family sued the defendant asking for the following declarations:

[p.312]

(a) that the Kokodo Ebiradzi stool family of Fijai possessed only one stool;

(b) that the said family had no second or any other stool at a place called Ntangofu;

(c) that the only stool of the family was the one being occupied by the defendant and that the defendant was not occupying any other stool at Ntangofu; and lastly

(d) an order of perpetual injunction restraining the defendant from holding himself out as odikro of Fijai or performing any functions as such so long as the defendant claimed to occupy a stool at Ntangofu.

The defendant, Nana Kobina Angu II, as admitted by all the parties, was and still is the occupant of the said family stool, and in the circumstances he has been and still is the recognised chief of Fijai. The defendant was sued in his capacity as the chief of Fijai and in a case like this, there is a customary obligation that the chief must bring the court action to the attention or notice of all the principal members or elders of the stool who, together with the chief, would ultimately have to find money to defend the action. The defendant did exactly this when he was served with the plaintiff’s writ of summons.

The Kokodo Ebiradzi stool family is made up of about nine branches, each branch having its own s