AWUDU FRAFRA v. AMEGAITIGO KANDIGANABA

This appeal arises from a land-use dispute governed by local custom in the Kassena-Nankanmi area. The Plaintiff-Appellant, a Frafra, sought to allocate to himself and farm an area vacated by Adongo, a Grunshieman who returned to “French country,” claiming ancestral cultivation and asserting he is the Tindana (caretaker) for the area. The Defendant-Respondent, identified as the Nankanni Chief, opposed the claim, showing that Adongo had secured permission from the real Nankanni Tindana and the Chief, and before leaving expressed that the Defendant-Respondent should farm the land, which the Tindana accepted. The court emphasized the Atankridi river as the recognized boundary between Nankannis and Frafras and the custom requiring consent of the appropriate Tindana—normally Nankanni—on the Nankanni side. Finding the Plaintiff-Appellant’s Tindana assertion suspect and the Defendant-Respondent’s entitlement grounded in custom and consent, the appellate court upheld the lower court’s judgment and directed that possession be ensured for the Defendant-Respondent without disturbance by the Plaintiff-Appellant.