DALIKE DZATA & ANOTHER v. KOFI AGBENYO
2021
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
- OFOE,J.A
- BARTELS-KODWO,J.A
- BERNASKO ESSAH, J.A
Areas of Law
- Civil Procedure
- Evidence Law
- Property and Real Estate Law
- Tort Law
2021
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
In a land dispute over Kpeta lands at Ave Kpedome, plaintiffs traced title to their ancestor Togbe Tokoni and sought declaration of title, possession, injunction, accounting for 100 uprooted palm trees (valued GHC 2000), damages for trespass, and punitive costs. The defendant asserted title to neighboring Govieame lands through Torgbui Zallah and relied on earlier Dzodze District Court judgments (1993 and 2009) said to have affirmed his rights. After the District Court ruled for plaintiffs, the High Court set aside that judgment and granted the defendant’s counterclaim. Plaintiffs appealed again. The Court of Appeal focused on the missing Dzodze judgment rejected by the magistrate and not placed on the record, noting res judicata might strip jurisdiction. Applying Evidence Act principles on rejected documents and powers to call/recall witnesses, and Rule 26 on new evidence, the Court ordered the defendant to produce the Dzodze judgment and directed that fresh evidence be adduced to incorporate it into the record for a just final determination.
OFOE,J.A:
This case on appeal before us originated from the District Court, Ave Dakpa, in the Volta Region. It was a case which was wholly home brewed in the sense that the parties prepared the court processes themselves and conducted their case without legal assistance. After they had filed their respective cases the trial magistrate found it fit to order pleadings. Again, these were filed by the parties without any legal assistance. At the conclusion of trial before the magistrate court the plaintiff had judgment. The defendant successfully appealed against the judgment to the High Court. It is this High Court judgment which is on further appeal to this court. We will maintain the description of the parties as plaintiffs and defendant as they were in the trial court. A brief back ground of the case should make our opinion clearer.
The plaintiff sued the defendant in the District Court for:
“1. A declaration of title and recovery of possession to a piece and parcel of land situate at Ave Kpedome (boundaries supplied)
2. Perpetual injunction against the appellant, his agents, assigns, privies and workmen.
3. An Order directed at the appellant to account for 100 palm trees or its equivalent value of GHC2000 being trees that were uprooted without respondent’s consent.
4. Damages for trespass and
5. Punitive Cost”.
He was joined in the course of proceedings by the 2nd plaintiff. By their pleadings they sought declaration of title to land which they described as follows:
“On one side by Gbetsi’s land
On another side by Tokonyo’s land
On other side by Anyedu’s land
And on the last side by Donyo’s land”.
What we gather from their pleadings is that this land known as Kpeta lands was founded by their great grandfather Tokoni. It is this land the defendant had trespassed on and felled 100 palm trees. Earlier they had filed a suit against the defendant at the Dzodze Magistrate Court but because of the failure of their lawyers to attend court the case was adjourned sine die. It would appear the parties have been disputing over this land for sometime now because according to the 1st plaintiff the defendant had had occasions to assaulted her three times on farm she cultivated on this land.
The defendant on his part claimed the land in dispute which he mentioned as Govieame lands with the following boundaries
“On one side by the property of Tokoni
On the another side by the property of Bedzi
On another side by the property of Tokoni
On the last sid