ASONAHENE KWASI MANYEH v. MR. JONAS FRANK AKO-LARBI

JUDGMENT

SAEED K GYAN, JA

In a way, this appeal seems to me to be quaintly reminiscent of the narrative contained in 1Kings 3; 16-28. Every conscientious Bible student or avid reader of the Good Book must be familiar with the classical case of the two women contending over one dead child and a living one, which came before wise King Solomon. Each of the mothers, naturally, fought for the living child as their own. King Solomon ordered:

“ Cut the baby in half!

That way each of you

Can have part of him”

(see page 287 of The POVERTY & JUSTICE BIBLE).

The rest of the story, as is often said, is history.

In the instant case, the Defendant/Appellant had appealed against the judgment of the Akropong Akwapim Circuit Court, dated 25th August 2011, on the sole ground that the decision of the Court was against the weight of the evidence and sought an order of this Court setting aside the aforesaid judgment of the Trial Tribunal.

Ultimately, however, Learned Counsel for the Defendant/Appellant, in his written submission, prayed that this Court of Appeal should set aside the judgment of the trial Court and order a rehearing of the case altogether.

This case was initiated in 1993. The original Plaintiff, Jonas Frank Ako-Larbi died and was substituted by Kwame Offei-Gyebi, who having also died was substituted by Samuel Larbi.

Remarkably, the original Defendant, Asonahene Kwesi Manyeh similarly died and was substituted by Godfred Addo Manyeh, who also having died was substituted by Bruce Manyeh Koranteng.

As was to be expected, the case, from 1993, went through the hands of a number of judges before judgment was eventually delivered by Ernest Obempeh, J as Additional Circuit Court Judge in August 2011.

The Plaintiff/Respondent (hereafter referred to simply as Plaintiff or Respondent) commenced the suit by a Writ of Summons backed by an 11-paragraph statement of claim seeking a declaration of title to a piece or parcel of land located at Abiriw Akwapem; recovery of possession of the said land; perpetual injunction; damages for trespass and damages for conversion.

The Defendant in response filed an 18-paragraph statement of defence together with a counter-claim praying for the “enforcement of arbitration award against the Plaintiff” as well as “general damages”.

It was the case of the Plaintiff that his property, which is the land in dispute, shares boundary with the property of the Defendant, among other boundary features. He averred that he acquired the lan