October 26, 2016
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
The Court of Appeal of Ghana, constituted by ADJEI, J.A. (Presiding), CECILIA H. SOWAH, J.A., and L.L. MENSAH, J.A., reviewed a land dispute from the Circuit Court at Akropong‑Akwapim concerning family land at Aburi Kitase. The Plaintiff, head of the Oyoko family, had obtained judgment for declaration of title, possession, and damages, and the 1st Defendant’s counterclaim was dismissed. On appeal, the bench analyzed the limitation defense and the trial court’s sua motu fraud findings against registered indentures (exhibits 2–5). Applying section 10 of the Limitation Act and section 25(1) of the Land Registry Act, and evaluating evidence of long‑standing adverse possession (residence, piggery, teak plantation, grazing), the Court held the Plaintiff’s action was statute‑barred. It further ruled that fraud had neither been pleaded nor proven to the criminal standard. The Circuit Court’s judgment was set aside, perpetual injunction granted against the Plaintiff, general damages of GH¢2,000 awarded, special damages denied, and title on the counterclaim not determined due to the limitation bar.
ADJEI, J.A:
The Plaintiff sued the Defendants at the trial Circuit Court claiming for a declaration of title, recovery of possession of the disputed land at Aburi Kitase, an order for perpetual injunction and general damages.
The Defendants disputed the Plaintiff’s claim. The Defendants in their amended statement of defence filed pursuant to the order of the trial Circuit Court granted on 23rd February, 2014 denied the Plaintiff’s claim and counterclaimed against the Plaintiff for the same land. The Defendants in their paragraph 8 (a) of this statement of defence averred that the Plaintiff’s action is statute barred and therefore not maintainable in law. The Defendants averred that the Plaintiff’s claim is not maintainable in law by reason of the fact that the 1st Defendant registered the land in accordance with law and has since been in undisturbed possession of same for barely twenty years. The 1st Defendant’s further counterclaimed for declaration of title, general damages for trespass and two hundred Ghana cedis (GH¢200.00) specific damages being the value of the 1st Defendant’s teak on the land which were destroyed by the Plaintiff.
The trial Circuit Court heard the matter, gave judgment in favour of the Plaintiff and dismissed the 1st Defendant’s counterclaim. The Defendants being dissatisfied with the judgment of the trial Circuit Court filed an appeal against same to this Court.
The original grounds of appeal were two and they are as follows:
“a. That the judgment of the Honourable Court cannot be supported having regard to the evidence.
b. That the Honourable court erred in law in deciding that the title deeds of the appellant tendered as exhibits 2, 3, 4, and 5 were obtained by fraud”.
On 26th April, 2016 this Court granted leave to the Defendants/Appellants to amend his grounds of appeal and same was accordingly amended and filed within time. The amended grounds of appeal are as follows:
“a. That the judgment of the Honourable Trial Court is against the weight of evidence.
b. That the trial High court erred in holding that no concrete evidence had been led by 1st Defendant to indicate that Plaintiff’s action before the Court in respect of exhibit 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 (inclusive) were statute barred.
c. That the trial judge erred in law in deciding suo motu, in the absence of any evidence on the record that exhibits 2, 3, 4, and 5 were obtained.
d. That the trial Judge failed to adequately examine the composite plan submitted by the Defen