Try asking the following...
J U D G M E N T
BAFFOE-BONNIE JSC:
…In the case of Achoro v Akanfela [1996-97] SCGLR 209, at pg 214, Acquah JSC, (as he then was) made the following pronouncement:
“Now in an appeal against findings of facts to a second appellate court like this court, where the lower court had concurred in the findings of the trial court, especially in a dispute, the subject of which is peculiarly within the bosom of the two lower courts or tribunals, this court will not interfere with the concurrent findings of the lower courts unless it was established with absolute clearness that some blunder or error resulting in a miscarriage of justice, is apparent in the way which the tribunal dealt with the facts. It must be established eg. that the lower courts had clearly erred in the face of a crucial documentary evidence, or that a principle of evidence had not been properly applied…… or as pointed out in Robins v National Trust Co [1927]AC515, that the finding is so based on an erroneous proposition of the law that if that proposition is corrected the judgment disappears. In short it must be demonstrated that the judgment of the courts below are clearly wrong . See Allen v Quebec Warehouse Co(1886)12 AC 101”
Taking a cue from this quote, and having thoroughly reviewed the judgments rendered by both the trial judge and the Court of Appeal, particularly with regard to the concurrent findings of fact made by those two courts and having digested the submissions of both counsel before us, our initial reaction was to just dismiss the appeal and confirm the judgment of the Court of Appeal which we feel was very well thought out. However ,ex abundante cautela, and also to give permanent closure to an appellant who seems to be clutching at straws, we decided to give this appeal a more detailed treatment.
The facts in this case are fairly simple and admit of little controversy. At the High Court the plaintiff/appellant (hereafter appellant) issued a writ claiming:
“A declaration of title to all that piece or parcel of land more particularly described in the statement of claim
Recovery of possession
Perpetual injunction
And general damages”
The appellant’s claim to title on the land was premised on the fact that he obtained his title under a grant from the Oshilanaa quarter of Labadi. The transaction was duly recorded and registered in the year 1959and he immediately started exercising rights of ownership over the land by erecting corner pillars on the land.
Sometime late