FUGAR v. BOSSMAN AND ANOTHER

By his statement of claim the plaintiff averred as follows:

"(1) The plaintiff is the owner of the land described in the writ.

(2) By reason of the plaintiff's absence from Ghana, the plaintiff appointed his brother a Mr. F. K. Fugar as caretaker of the land in dispute.

(3) The said F. K. Fugar fraudulently and without the knowledge or authority of the plaintiff purported to convey by deed by way of outright sale the said land to the first defendant.

(4) The first defendant entered into possession of the said land in reliance on the aforesaid fraudulent conveyance and either granted portion to or permitted the second defendant to trespass unto the plaintiff's said land.

(5) Without the leave or licence of the plaintiff the defendants wrongfully brought unto the land sand and stones and are in wrongful possession thereof.

(6) Wherefore the plaintiff claims as in the writ of summons:

(a) Recovery of possession of the said land.

(b) £G50 damages."

It does not appear that the first defendant, Dr. J. E. Bossman, was ever served and he therefore neither entered appearance nor filed a statement of defence to the plaintiff's statement of claim. The second defendant [p.17] however entered appearance and filed a statement of defence in the following terms:

"(1) The defendant denies the allegation in paragraph (1) of the statement of claim.

(2) The defendant also denies the allegations contained in paragraphs (2) (3) and (4) of the statement of claim.

(3) The defendant admits having put some sand and stones on the land but says that she did so with lawful authority.

(4) The defendant denies that the plaintiff is entitled to any of the reliefs she claims in paragraph (6) of the statement of claim.

(5) Save as hereinbefore expressly admitted the defendant denies each and every allegation contained in the plaintiff's statement of claim as if the same were herein set out in detail and traversed seriatim."

To this inadequate and unsatisfactory defence the second defendant without leave, and after the hearing of the summons for directions when a date had been fixed for the hearing of the suit, added a further plea that she was in possession.

At the hearing of the suit, the appellant's attorney gave evidence and deposed to the following facts: that the land in dispute was bought by the appellant through his brother one F. K. Fugar to whom the appellant had remitted the sum of £G250 for that purpose; that the vendor of the land had executed a deed of convey