JOHN KOFI AMPRATWUM v. ATTA SARPONG & ANOTHER
March 3, 2006
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
- FARKYE J.A. (PRESIDENT)
- ABBAN (MRS) J.A.
- KUSI APPIAH J.A.
Areas of Law
- Property and Real Estate Law
- Civil Procedure
- Evidence Law
- Tort Law
March 3, 2006
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
In the Court of Appeal, Kusi-Appiah J.A. authored a decision reversing the High Court of Mampong-Ashanti (W. H. K. Addo J.), which had granted the Bretuo familys head, suing for himself and his family, declaratory and injunctive relief over land at Abenuase on Mampong stool lands. The second defendant, the head of the Gyase Stool, maintained that the Gyase Stool owns the land and that the plaintiffs family farmed by licence granted through marriage at Mpanua. The Court of Appeal reviewed the record and the law on licences and adverse possession, finding the plaintiffs occupation was by licence and that long possession by a licensee does not confer title. It further held that sections 10(1), (5) and (6) of N.R.C.D. 54 did not apply because time does not run against a licensor until a licence is revoked. The appeal was allowed and the land restored to the Gyase Stool, with F.T. Farkye J.A. and H. Abban (Mrs) J.A. concurring.
KUSI-APPIAH, J. A. :
This appeal is from the decision of the High Court, Mampong-Ashanti, given on 28th March, 2004 per W. H. K. Addo J. by which the learned Judge entered judgment for the plaintiff/respondent (herein after called the plaintiff) against the defendants/appellants (hereinafter called the defendants) and decreed titled in the disputed land in the plaintiff.
The case of the plaintiff as gathered from his pleadings and especially evidence at the trial, is that, he is the head of Bretuo family of Dadieso near Mampong-Ashanti and he sues on his own behalf and on behalf of his family.
He contended that he has been in possession of the disputed land lying at a place commonly known as Abenuase on Mampong stool land and shares a boundary with Gyasehene of Mampong/Ashanti, Atuahene and Yaw Sarfo.
He claimed that his ancestors have been in effective possession of the disputed land without any interference for almost two hundred years until the present trespass by the defendant.
The plaintiff avers further that about six years prior to instituting this action, the Gyasehene who was then sick requested him to show the second defendant the boundary between the Gyasehene and himself since the second defendant was likely to succeed the Gyasehene upon his demise.
According to the plaintiff he complied with the Gyasehene’s request in the company of the second defendant, one Yaw Krah and the late Sarfo and Atuahene.
Thereafter, the second defendant offered him an amount of (¢300, 000.
He testified that the defendants subsequently entered the said land and started destroying planted maize and continued to do so in spite of entreaties to them to stop their acts of trespass on their land.
On 5th September, 1994, the plaintiff therefore brought an action against the defendants jointly and severally, for the following reliefs: “(a) A declaration that the land situate and lying at a place commonly known as “Abenuase” land having boundaries with properties of Gyasehene of Mampong/Ashanti, Atuahene and Yaw Sarfo is his family property(b) Damages for trespass, and (c) Perpetual injunction restraining the defendants their servants and privies from entering unto the land and in no way interfere with the said land”The defendants resisted the plaintiff’s claim.
By paragraph 3 of the statement of defence, the second defendant says that he is the head of family of the Gyase Stool, owners of t