KWAMI v. QUAYNOR

JUDGMENT OF VAN LARE AG. C. J.

In this case the plaintiff - appellant, relying upon the oral grant to him of a certain piece of land by the Osu Stool in 1933 (confirmed by a Deed of Conveyance in 1957), sued the defendant - respondent for a declaration of title, damages for trespass and an injunction in respect of the said land. The defendant - respondent also laid claim to the land. He relied on a grant to his father, whom he had succeeded according to Osu native customary law. This grant was of a larger area, of which the disputed land forms part, and it had been made by the elders of Osu Alata Quarter in 1897.

There was evidence, which the trial-judge accepted, that after the grant to him the respondent's late father remained in undisturbed possession till his death in 1933, and also that the respondent's brothers have built on another portion of the larger area granted to their late father. These were questions of fact which do not appear to have been in dispute, but the respondent challenged the right of the Osu Mantse to grant the disputed land at all to the appellant, and pleaded that the purported grant and conveyance passed no title to the appellant.

On the authorities, it is clear that the Osu Mantse is the proper authority to grant Osu Stool lands; that is to say, land which is not a Quarter Stool land nor a Quarter "outskirt" land. This has been understood and followed by the courts since the judgment of Jackson J., delivered in the Land Court, Accra, in an Acquisition Enquiry under the Public Lands Ordinance on the 24th July, 1951, now popularly known and referred to as the "R.E. Acquisition Case." An appeal against that decision was dismissed by the West African Court of Appeal (see 14 W.A.C.A. 492). It is also a well established principle of law that the head and elders of a Quarter Stool in Osu constitute the proper authority to grant a Quarter land. On the other hand, where unalienated "outskirt" land is in the charge of the head and elders of a Quarter, the final decision whether or not to make a grant of such land rests in the Osu Mantse. But, although the Osu Mantse may reject the advice of such head and elders of a Quarter, he cannot himself make a valid grant without prior consultation with them (Aryee v. Adefoley, 13 W.A.C.A. 161).

In the instant case, the learned trial-Judge found as a fact, not only upon the evidence led before him in Court but also from a visit to the area by the Court, that the land which is the subject-matte