Try asking the following...
Try asking the following...
June 29, 1961
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
JUDGMENT OF PREMPEH J.
This suit was instituted in the Tongu Local Court B and was by order dated the 20th April, 1956 transferred to the Land Court, Accra, and subsequently transferred to this court.
The plaintiffs sued as the duly appointed and recognised heads of the Djavier tribe of Tefle. [His lordship then read the judgment of Coussey, J. set out in the headnote supra and continued:] The plaintiffs claim an order for partition of the land so that the plaintiffs may have as their exclusive [p.442] property the area on which they have been firmly established and the defendants to have that area on which they have been firmly established as found by the court.
It is to be noted that the parties to this suit are the same as in the second of the consolidated suits in exhibit D tendered herein, to which I shall later refer. In their statement of claim, the plaintiffs reproduced the extract of the judgment of Coussey, J. of 1950 contained in the writ of summons, [reproduced in the headnote supra] and they averred that in spite of that judgment the effect of which settled the plaintiffs firmly on their Tamlago portion of the land, and the defendants on the eastern portion thereof, the defendants had been constantly disturbing the plaintiffs in their occupation and use of their said Tamlago land, and gave instances of such interferences in paragraph 4 thereof.
The plaintiffs averred further that the conduct of the defendants and their people have made it impossible for the two tribes to live peacefully and harmoniously as joint owners, and that was the reason for the action for an order for partitioning the land, and for perpetual injunction.
By their statement of defence, the defendants admitted as correct the capacity in which the plaintiffs brought this action, and also the extract of the judgment of the Land Court, Accra, reproduced in the writ of summons and repeated in the statement of claim, but they denied having by themselves or their agents or servants or people, interfered with the plaintiffs in the enjoyment of their Tamlago land. The defendants denied that they were guilty of any conduct which entitled the plaintiffs to a partition of the land and they pleaded further that the plaintiffs' claim was untenable according to native custom.
Upon these pleadings, three main issues are raised for determination.
They are:
(a) whether the defendants have been constantly disturbing the plaintiffs in their lawful and quiet enjoyment of the Tam
AI Generated Summary
Prempeh J. adjudicated a dispute between the Djavier tribe of Tefle and the Hervier/Sukpe tribe regarding jointly held land around Tamlago. The plaintiffs, as recognized heads of the Djavier tribe, sought partition and a perpetual injunction, relying on a 1919 plan (Exhibit A) and the 1950 Land Court judgment (Exhibit D) that acknowledged a rough division: Djaviers on Tamlago between specified creeks and Herviers settled eastwards toward the Volta River. The court identified three issues: interference, custom, and entitlement to partition/injunction. It credited plaintiffs’ testimony of repeated encroachments and found defendants’ denials and claims of a prohibitive Sukpe custom unsupported; the Sukpe paramount chief could cite no instance of partition being barred. Applying principles from Sappor v. Amartey and the evidence of occupation, the court ordered partition with a precise dividing line and granted a perpetual injunction, entering judgment for the plaintiffs.