KWAKU JONAS v. NANA KWAME NKRUMAH & ANOTHER

J U D G M E N T

MARFUL-SAU, JA:-

In 1974 the plaintiff/respondent herein to be referred to as the respondent was granted two different parcels of land by Nana Kwesi Gyabeng, the then Chief of Bodi. The two lands which measured one local mile each were located at Kofiano and Kankyeabo all part of Bodi stool land. According to the respondent he paid the customary drink of ¢1, 000.00 (GH¢100) for the two parcels of land to the chief of Bodi. He also paid a demarcation fee of c5. The respondent then cultivated cocoa on the two lands and enjoyed quite possession of the land. In 1979 the respondent gave the land at Kankyeabo to one Godwin under an abunu tenancy. In that same year the first defendant/ appellant, herein to be referred to as first appellant, became the new chief of Sefwi- Bodi. Later in 1996, the respondent divided the Kankyeabo land into two between himself and Godwin and appointed a caretaker for his portion of the cocoa farm.

In 1997, the first appellant dissatisfied with the grant made to the respondent by his predecessor, unilaterally took over the Kankyeabo land from the respondent with the connivance of the second appellant, claiming that the two lands granted to the respondent were not properly acquired. The record indicates that first appellant from the takeover harvested the cocoa from the farm and kept the proceeds to himself. Aggrieved by the conduct of the first appellant the respondent took out a writ of summons against the appellants claiming the following:-

‘’ i. A declaration of title, ownership and recovery of possession of all that piece and parcel of land with cocoa thereon situate and lying at a place called ‘’Kankyeabo’’ bounded by the properties of Godwin, Prosper, Ama Bonsu and the Kankyeabo stream on Bodi Stool Land.

ii. Damages for trespass.

iii. Accounts for the recovery of the proceeds of the cocoa from the farm in dispute since 1997.

iv. Perpetual injunction restraining the defendants, their servants, agents or workmen from interfering with the title and possession and enjoyment of the farm in dispute.’’

The appellants who initially filed separate statements of defence through the same Solicitor opposed the claims of the respondent. The appellants in the course of the proceedings sought leave and filed a composite statement of defence and counterclaimed for the following:-

‘’a. A declaration that the plaintiff acquisition of the lands situate at Kofiano and Kankyeabo is unlawful. The land situate at Kofiano is