KWAKU BAMFI ADOMAKO & ANOTHER v. OPANIN KOFIDUODU & OTHERS

J U D G M E N T

WOOD (MRS), C. J:-

On the 21st of December, 2011, we dismissed the appeal against the decision of the Court of Appeal delivered on the 10th of February 2006, and reserved the reasons for that conclusion. We now provide them.

The Plaintiffs/ Appellants/Respondents (Respondents), who are husband and wife claim to have purchased the land, the subject matter of this appeal, from the Asakyiri Aduamoah family of Aburi represented by Nana Odjobi Aduamoah IV (now deceased) as the lawful head of the family and with the consent and concurrence of the elders of the said family. The property was to be used for the construction of a vocational school. Following the alleged purchase, Nana Odjobi brought to the respondents an indenture, Exhibit B, and executed same. It was subsequently registered by the respondents.

They maintain that they were however compelled to institute proceedings in the High Court, in protection of their right to ownership of the property, when the appellants, led by the 6th appellant, who succeeded Nana Odjobi as the head of the family, challenged their right to title through various adverse acts.

The appellants however vehemently challenge the alleged sale transaction on grounds of mixed facts and law. Firstly, they contended that the 1st appellant, who happens to be the actual head of family of the owners of the land, never sold the land to the respondents. They maintain that the interest which they conveyed and which the respondents acquired was not an outright sale, but a conditional licence for the use of the 20 acres of their family land, albeit for a school project. Secondly, they contended that in any event, Nana Odjobi had no lawful authority to sell their family land at Adamorobe, and consequently, any purported sale by him was altogether void. Thirdly, they maintain that even if any such sale transaction took place, it was without the consent and concurrence of the principal elders of the family and therefore a nullity.

Not surprisingly, they set out the conditions on which the alleged licence was granted. These were that:

a. That profit from operating the school would be shared equally between the parties

b. The respondents will build a family house at Adamorobe for the Odjobi Aduamoah Asakyiri family

c. The respondents would establish a cement block factory at Adamorobe from which members of the said family could purchase cement block at concessionary rate to build their personal houses.

d. The school projec