DORYUMU II & ORS. v. ABABIO II

JUDGMENT OF VAN LARE J.A.

Van Lare J.A. delivered the judgment of the Court:

We give our reasons for dismissing this appeal on the 3rd March, 1959.

The proceedings in this matter originated under, and are governed by, the Forests Ordinance. During the course of an enquiry into claims in connection with the Bimpong Forest Reserve certain disputes arose between the parties in this appeal as to the ownership of land lying within the proposed Reserve. On the 10th day of [p.139] March, 1954 the Reserve Settlement Commissioner, acting under section 9(2) of the Ordinance, referred certain issues to the Native Court of the Denkyire Confederacy Grade “A” for determination. There could be no doubt that the decision of the Native Court was to be merely interlocutory, as its decision had to be otherwise implemented. The boundaries of the land found to be owned by the respective parties had to be delineated, and a survey had to be undertaken to enable a written description of the boundaries of each plot ascertained to be recorded, and to be produced and given in evidence at the Court of the Reserve Settlement Commissioner at the resumed enquiry. The Reserve Settlement Commissioner was enjoined by section 9(6) of the Ordinance to accept and adopt the judgment of the Native Court in his own judgment upon completion of the enquiry; and a right is given by section 16 to appeal from that decision directly to this Court.

Although the law provided that upon such reference it shall be deemed for all purposes to be a civil suit brought before such Native Court, and shall be tried and determined accordingly, nowhere in the Ordinance was provision made giving a right of appeal from a decision of the Native Court upon such reference. It is commonplace that no appeal lies as of right against the order of any court unless given by statute. Nevertheless the appellant in this Court, being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the decision of the Native Court, appealed to the Land Court, Cape Coast, which dismissed his appeal on the 30th December, 1954. It is against that judgment or order dismissing the appeal that the appellant obtained special leave to appeal to this Court.

With respect, the learned Judge of the Land Court, Cape Coast, erred twice, but on each occasion in favour of the appellant. Firstly, he failed to consider whether the appeal lay at all to his Court from the decision of the Native Court upon such reference; in our opinion it did not lie. Secondly, he granted spe