MANTI SAMUEL KWASI AND MANTI PETER v. JOHN TEGLESU AND GEORGE ADDAE
February 24, 2023
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
- HIS LORDSHIP AYITEY ARMAH-TETTEH J
Areas of Law
- Property and Real Estate Law
- Civil Procedure
February 24, 2023
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
Try asking the following...
By their writ of summons dated 4 September 2018 the Plaintiffs claim against the
defendants the following reliefs :
a. Declaration of title of the land under dispute.
b. Recovery of possession.
c. Perpetual Injunction restraining the Defendants by themselves, their agents,
workmen, assigns, servants or anyone remotely connected with Defendants from
laying claim to Plaintiffs’ land.
The Plaintiffs writ of summons was accompanied by a 22 paragraphed statement of claim.
Upon service of the writ of summons and statement of claim on them, the defendants
entered appearance through their lawyer. They subsequently filed a defence and denied
the claim of the Plaintiffs in its entirety but did not counter claim. In the course of the trial
, the defendants dispensed with services of their lawyer.
PLAINTIFFS’ CASE
The case of the Plaintiffs as can be gleaned from their pleadings is that the 1st Plaintiff is
the head of the Mante family of Bowiri Kwamekrom and the 2nd plaintiff a member of the
said family. Their father known as Mante Kwasi Kwao acquired a piece of land at a place
known and called “Konsa” at Abowire. According to Plaintiffs after the death of their
father the property was handed over to their senior brother John Mante and he cultivated
it till he died in 1993. That after the death of John Mante the property has been in the
possession of the Plaintiffs’ family. According to Plaintiffs in 2003 the defendant brought
an action against them at the District Court, Jasikan in respect of the subject matter in
dispute. That the matter was later withdrawn by the defendants for settlement out of
court and sent to the Amankrado of Bowiri Nana Asamani to settle . It is the case of the
Plaintiffs that the elders who sat on the case did not allow the witnesses of the Plaintiffs
to testify. Plaintiffs say that they disagree with the settlement and did not sign the terms
of settlement reached by the Nana Asamani’s settlement panel. It is the further claim of
the Plaintiffs that the defendants have trespassed on the land and are selling portions to
unsuspecting buyers .
DEFENDANTS’ CASE
The defendants denied the claim of the Plaintiffs and said they are descendants and heirs
of one Nana Teglesu I (deceased) of Bowiri Abohire, Kwamekrom, who founded a vast
tract of land called Abohire land made up a forest and grassland situate at Bowiri-
Abohire. According to Defendants Nana Teglesu I owned and held the “Konsa”
(grassland) lands for and o
AI Generated Summary
This High Court land dispute pits the Mante family of Bowiri Kwamekrom (led by the first plaintiff as family head and a second plaintiff member) against descendants of Nana Teglesu I of Bowiri Abohire over “Konsa” grassland. The Mante side says their father, Mante Kwasi Kwao, acquired and possessed the land, later managed by brother John Mante until 1993. The Teglesu family asserts Konsa belongs to them and plaintiffs were only given adjoining forest (“Lupo”) land decades ago. A 2003 Jasikan District Court case was withdrawn for settlement before Mankrado Nana Asamani; his panel set boundaries and payment, and the District Court struck the matter out as settled, adopting a consent judgment. In 2018, plaintiffs again sought declaration, possession, and injunction. Applying the civil burden of proof, the High Court found the 2003 settlement and consent judgment final; plaintiffs should have sought to set it aside on vitiating grounds. Estoppel/res judicata barred re-litigation, so the claim was dismissed without costs.