NANA OTUO ANTWI BOASIAKO VS NANA ADJEI PANIN

TORKORNOO (MRS. ) JSC: -

Introduction In 1927, almost one hundred years ago, the ancestors of the parties to the appeal herein met before the Native Tribunal of Kumasi in contest over the boundary between the Abonu (also spelt Abono and Abornu in various parts of the record of this suit) stool and the Deduako (also spelt Dediako) stool in the Ashanti region.

In that 1927 law suit, the progenitor of the Plaintiff/Respondent/Appellant in the appeal before us (hereafter referred to as Plaintiff) was called Kofi Tumtuo and the progenitor of the current Defendant/Appellant/Respondent (Defendant) was Kwame Adjaye.

The current parties have been in contest over the boundary between the Abonu stool and the Deduako since 2007, eighty years after their earlier boundary dispute started.

History of current suit Plaintiff’s claims In the writ issued on 25th April 2007, the plaintiff indorsed the following claims 1. A declaration of title to and recovery of possession of all that piece or parcel of stool land known and called Abornu and bounded by the following town/villages Kuntunase, Deduako, Adwafo, Nyameani and Obo 2. Damages for Trespass 3. Perpetual Injunction restraining the defendant, his relatives agents/servants from having any dealings with the Abornu land In the accompanying statement of claim, plaintiff averred in paragraphs 3 and 4 that his stool owned all that land bounded by the stool lands of Kuntanase (also spelt Kuntenase in the records), Deduako, Adwafo Nyameani and Obo and that the boundaries of Abonu and Deduako were marked by ‘Atta-ne Atta, Tetrefu Obuokrukro, ntome, odum tree, paapa tree, onyina tree, ntome, a hill called bipokoko, onyina tree and Nyameani stream’ (hereafter referred to as the Atta ne Atta -Bipokoko-Nyameani boundary direction)After this, he went on to aver in paragraphs 9 to 11 that in the 1927 suit, the boundaries between their stool lands as shown by defendant’s ancestor begun from‘Tetrefo Yineban stream, cemetery, onyina tree, Abankransu and Akatasu junction, Abankransu source, bamboo plants and Kuman stream’ (hereafter referred to as the Tetrefo-Yineban-Kuman boundary direction). It is these features shown by the Deduako stool that were accepted by the Native Tribunal in order for judgment to be given in favor of the defendant in 1927. According to plaintiff, since the 1927 judgment, the Abonu stool has remained on the right side of the said Tetrefo-Yineban-Kuman boundary direction whilst the Dediako stool has been on the