2015
SUPREME COURT
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
The case involves a dispute over the allodial title to land between the Drobohene and Japekromhene. The trial court dismissed Drobohene's claim as he could not prove his residual interest in the land. The appellants argued that the Drobohene inherited the allodial title after the partition of the Bono Kingdom, which placed part of it under British rule. However, it was shown that the Drobohene's position as an overlord stemmed from British administrative actions and not customary elevation. The evidence supported Japekromhene's original occupancy and rights over the land. The High Court and Court of Appeal both ruled in favor of Japekromhene. The Supreme Court affirmed these decisions, confirming Japekromhene's allodial title.
J U D G M E N T
ATUGUBA, JSC:-
The central issue in this appeal is whether it is the Drobohene or Japekromhene who has allodial title to the land in dispute. The trial court held that though the Drobohene might have some residual interest in the disputed land he failed to prove its nature and extent and therefore dismissed his claim thereto.
The crux of counsel for the appellants’ submission is that as allodial title to the land in dispute formerly vested in the Bono or Gyaman Paramount chief who fell on the French Ivory Coast side of a partition of the territory of the Bono Kingdom between the French and the English, that title devolved on the Drobohene who was made Paramount Chief over the English side of the Bono Kingdom consequent upon the said partition.
It is however clear from the record of proceedings that the claim of overlordship of Japekrom and other villages after the partition of the Bono or Gyaman Kingdom is based on British administrative elevation and not customary elevation by the Bono or Jaman customary overlord of the contesting parties.
The evidence of DW4, the Bonohene or Gyamanhene at P.222 of the record of appeal is as follows:
“I did not appoint him (Drobohene) as a paramount chief. He was Adontewaa. At the time of the demarcation of the boundary between the French and the British, the Drobohene was not an Omanhene. I testified in a land dispute between Drobo and Dwenem. I also elected somebody to testify in another land dispute between Drobo and Japekrom. I had nothing to do with the status of Drobohene.”(e.s)
Thus at p.229 of the record of appeal the Court of Appeal unanimously per Irene Danquah J.A poignantly stated thus:
“It must be stressed that it is the Co-Plaintiff’s case that he derived his allodial interest in the lands he is claiming because he was made the Omanhene by Gyamanhene after the demarcation of the boundary between the French and the English colonist. He claimed further that by that status acquired from Gyamanhene he automatically became the allodial owner of all lands including Japekrom and specifically Faago which were under Gyamanhene. In our view these assertions fell flat considering the evidence of the Gyamanhene before the Special Committee as well as his evidence in this action. As we stated earlier, the Drobohene did not challenge the Gyamanhene when he stated in no uncertain terms that he did not make the Drobohene the Omanhene. Not only that but he confirmed the history narrated by Japekrom th