ANKRAH v. OFORI AND OTHERS
January 15, 1974
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
- AZU CRABBE C.J.
- LASSEY
- HAYFRON-BENJAMIN JJ.A
Areas of Law
- Property and Real Estate Law
January 15, 1974
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
Try asking the following...
JUDGMENT OF AZU CRABBE C.J.
The short, but nonetheless, interesting point that arises on this appeal is whether the learned trial judge was justified in holding that the respondents were entitled to protection under the Land Development (Protection of Purchasers) Act, 1960 (Act 2).
On 2 October J965, the appellant caused a writ of summons to issue in which he claimed against the respondents the following reliefs:
(1) A declaration of his title to a piece of land forming part of the Kokomlemle lands in Accra;
(2) Four hundred and eighty cedis (¢480.00) damages for trespass;
(3) Recovery of possession of the said land; and
(4) Perpetual injunction.
The evidence was short and simple, and after a careful analysis of the case for the plaintiff and for the defence, the learned trial judge made four crucial findings. The first finding is contained in the following passage of the judgment:
"The first issue to be resolved is whether the plaintiff is the owner of the disputed plot which is edged green, red and yellow, respectively, on the plan, exhibit X. There is no doubt, whatsoever, that the plaintiff was granted the plot in dispute by one Ayitey Quaye who originally had his grant from Atukpai stool. This is borne out by exhibit B which was executed on 27 May 1952."
[p.188]
This is immediately followed by the second finding:
"It is also clear that after the Kokomlemle consolidated suits, the plaintiff lost his title to the disputed plot and was finally dispossessed of this plot by the judgment and the order of the High Court, Accra.
I therefore find that in December 1958, the Osu Tetteh family was in lawful possession and occupation of the plot in dispute and that that family had a right, with the consent of the allodial owners, the Ga, Gbese and Korle stools, to dispose of the said plot. Consequently, the sale of this plot to Mr. E. A. L. Bannerman by the said Osu Tetteh family with the concurrence of the said stools, as evidenced by the deed of conveyance, dated 30 December 1958, (exhibit 1), was valid. Exhibit G, tendered by the plaintiff himself, confirms that the sale to Mr. E. A. L. Bannerman took place on 30 December 1958.
It will therefore be seen that Mr. E. A. L. Bannerman became the rightful owner of the plot in dispute on 30 December 1958."
The Osu Tetteh family remained in lawful possession of the plot in dispute until 1960, when the Land Development (Protection of Purchasers) Act, 1960 (Act 2), was passed. The appellant availed himse
AI Generated Summary
This Court of Appeal decision, authored by Azu Crabbe C.J., addresses whether the trial judge properly protected the respondents under the Land Development (Protection of Purchasers) Act, 1960 (Act 2). The appellant had an earlier 1952 grant but, after the Kokomlemle consolidated suits, lost title; in 1958 the Osu Tetteh family, with the stools’ consent, conveyed to Mr. E. A. L. Bannerman. Later, Act 2 litigation reverted title to the appellant. Meanwhile, in 1965 the respondents, through guardian ad litem Ofori Atta and caretaker Wilkinson Sai Annan, paid ¢600, were placed into possession, and built two houses over nine months. The trial judge found good faith and refused recovery and trespass damages, awarding compensation. On appeal, the court interpreted “conveyance” (including customary transfers) and “claiming through” a purchaser, held the sale valid under customary law, and affirmed protection under Act 2. Lassey J.A. and Hayfron‑Benjamin J.A. concurred; the appeal was dismissed.