NANA ESSEL AMOQUANDOH III & ORS VS RICHARD KWESI MENSAH & ORS

DARKO ASARE, JSC :

In this appeal against the judgment of the Court of Appeal, Accra delivered on the 4th of May 2023, the Plaintiffs/Appellants seek the setting aside of the judgment of the court below and for judgment to be entered in their favour. The judgment under appeal reversed the trial court’s decree of title to the disputed lands in favour of the Plaintiffs/Appellants, and also overturned the trial court’s grant of other endorsed reliefs including recovery of possession, setting aside alleged alienations to and by the Defendants, and an injunction.

The key question for our resolution in this appeal is whether the Court of Appeal correctly re-evaluated the evidence on record, applied the relevant law and consequently came to the right conclusion when it reversed the decision of the trial court in this suit.

The grounds of appeal formulated by the Plaintiffs/Appellants are as follows:-

i) That the judgment is against the weight of evidence adduced by the Parties before the trial court

ii) That the judgment is not supported in law.

For purposes of convenience, the Parties in these proceedings, shall bear the same designation they bore in the trial court and accordingly the Plaintiffs/Appellants herein shall be described simply as the Plaintiffs and the Defendants/Respondents herein as the Defendants.

Facts

The 1st, 2nd and 3rd Plaintiffs are the Odikro of Gomoa Fetteh Kakraba, the Ebusuapanyin of the Essel Amoquandoh Royal Family of Gomoa Fetteh Kakraba and the Omankrado Chief of Gomoa Fetteh Kakraba respectively. The Plaintiffs’ case which was essentially founded on traditional evidence was that the disputed land, collectively described as Gomoah Fetteh Kakrabah lands was their ancestral property acquired by first settlement and that the said lands include Gomoa Fetteh Kakrbah, Mamfam, Abura, Tuansa, Abakum, Essel Kwame, Fetteh Gua, Onsewodem, and Ojo lands. According to the Plaintiffs, even though their families’ title to the said lands had been affirmed in various previous judgments and possession decreed in their favour by those judgments, the Defendants have wilfully trespassed onto the said lands, alienated portions thereof to third parties and have been operating thereon as land guards. Contending that the Defendants have spurned all previous demands on them to abate their acts of trespass on their family lands, the Plaintiffs found themselves left with no other option but to institute the instant action. The prayer for relief follows