NANA ADDAI OWUSU v. NANA AFARI BOAGYAN II & ANOTHER
2021
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
- CECILIA SOWAH, J.A. (PRESIDING)
- ANTHONY OPPONG, J.A.
- ANGELINA MENSAH-HOMIAH, J.A.
Areas of Law
- Civil Procedure
- Property and Real Estate Law
- Evidence Law
2021
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
The Ghana Court of Appeal, per Anthony Oppong JA, set aside the High Court, Nkawkaws dismissal of the appellants claims concerning building plot No (1) at Amanfrom-Nkawkaw/Kwamang. The appellant bought the land in 1983 from Nana Asiamah, the then Obohene, took possession as a fetish priest ( Mmotia Komfo ), and established extensive structures. After losing documents, he repurchased the land to avoid litigation when challenged by the Nkawkawhene, Nana Yaw Frimpong, acting for the Obomeng stool, and obtained a fresh indenture (Exhibit 1). Later, the current Obohene (1st respondent) allocated part to the 2nd respondent, prompting police intervention; the 1st respondent acknowledged the appellants possession, and the 2nd respondent sought a refund and sued. On appeal, the Court found the appellants unshaken testimony, PW1s corroboration, locus observations, and the 2nd respondents affidavit decisive. It rejected the trial judges focus on missing documents and the misapplied forfeiture doctrine, applied nemo dat, held registration ineffectual without title, found no identity dispute, entered judgment for the appellant, and dismissed the 1st respondents counterclaim.
ANTHONY OPPONG, JA
On or about 3rd April, 2013, the plaintiff/appellant, to be simply called appellant for purposes of this judgment, caused a writ of summons to issue against defendants/respondents who shall also for purposes of this judgment be simply called respondents.
By way of reliefs, the appellant sought declaration of title and recovery of possession of all that building plot No (1) situate at Amanfrom-Nkawkaw, damages for trespass and an injunction against the respondents.
The respondents traversed the claim of appellant and joined issues with him. After the trial of the case by the High Court, Nkawkaw, appellant’s case was dismissed, hence this appeal which is expressive of appellant’s dissatisfaction of the judgment dismissing his claim.
For now it may be apposite to attempt a summary of the facts of the case. The appellant acquired the disputed land from the then chief of Obo called Nana Asiamah in 1983. After the land had been demarcated to appellant by elders of Kwaman upon the instructions of the chief of Obo, Nana Asiamah, appellant provided good consideration for the land. Receipts and documents evidencing the payment for the land and the acquisition of the land were issued to appellant by the chief of Obo. Appellant, who was then a practicing fetish priest took possession and practiced his ‘profession’ on the land.
Ostensibly, appellant put up structures on the land for the practice of the profession whereby he housed the sick who had come to his fetish shrine for cure and healing. He also housed his servants and his gods. He even put up a structure where he kept his pigs. He claimed he kept all the documents on the land in the room where the gods were kept. He apparently, in addition, carried out other various overt acts of possession and ownership of the land for so many years without any interference from anyone.
Some years after, appellant stopped the practice of fetishism and lost most of his documents covering the land he acquired.
Sometime later, he was confronted by the chief of Nkawkaw who requested to see the documents covering the land the appellant was occupying, amidst threat of recovering the land from appellant in his capacity as the custodian of the land for and on behalf of Obomeng stool. As a result of the appellant’s failure to trace the documents relating to the land, he was constrained to re-purchase the land from the chief of Nkawkaw, Nana Yaw Frimpong to avoid any litigation over the land with him. Consequen