OPANIN KOFI AGYEKUM MANU v. KWABENA BOATENG & ANOTHER
2016
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
- E. K. Ayebi, J.A. (Presiding)
- G. Torkornoo (Mrs), J.A.
- A. M. Domakyaareh (Mrs.), J.A.
Areas of Law
- Civil Procedure
- Evidence Law
2016
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
In this case, the plaintiff filed a writ in 2006 asserting claims over a piece of land, claiming various reliefs such as title, possession, damages for trespass, and an injunction against the defendants. In 2009, the High Court struck out the plaintiff’s action for want of prosecution, shifting the burden to the defendants to prove their counterclaim. They were able to discharge this burden, resulting in a 2014 ruling in their favor. The plaintiff's appeal was based on grounds including misidentification of the land, errors in arbitration findings, and inappropriate consideration of evidence. However, the appellate court found all these grounds to be meritless, thus dismissing the appeal and affirming the original judgment.
A. M. DOMAKYAAREH (MRS), J. A
1. This is an appeal against the judgment of the High Court, Kumasi dated 22nd December 2014 of which the reasons for same were given on 20th February 2015. The antecedents of this appeal are that the plaintiff/appellant issued a writ against the defendants/respondents on 14th September 2006 claiming the following reliefs:-
a) A declaration of title, possession, occupation of all that piece or parcel of land situate at a place called “Asiribuso” on Bomfa Stool land bounded by the properties of Akosua Sekyeraa (deceased), Osei Mensah (deceased), Yaa Afriyie, Asiribuso Stream and Nyame-Nye-Abro Stream
b) Damages for trespass
c) An order for perpetual injunction restraining the defendants, themselves, their agents, servants and workmen from in any way interfering with the plaintiff’s enjoyment of the said farm.
d) A declaration that the defendants are bound by the judgment of Juaben Traditional Council in a case of AKUA KWANKYEWAA VRS AKOSUA SEKYERAA.
2. The defendants/respondents entered appearance, and filed a defence and a counterclaim against the plaintiff claiming the following reliefs:
a) Declaration that by the arbitration award of the Juaben Traditional Council, they are the owners of all that piece and parcel of farm land being and lying at a place commonly known and called Adiesua on Nobewam Stool land and bounded by the properties of Afua Fofie, Kofi Oppong, Yaw Saa, Kwaku Nfum and Kwame Nomaya.
b) Damages for trespass
c) An order of perpetual injunction restraining the plaintiff, his assigns etc. from in any way interfering with the defendants’ possession and quiet enjoyment of the said land.
3. In the course of the trial, on 20th May 2009, the High Court struck out the plaintiffs action (for want of prosecution) see page 38 of the Record of Appeal. This meant that under Order 12 rule 3(a) of C.I. 47 the defendants became the plaintiffs in respect of their counterclaim and their Statement of Defence became the Statement of Claim as same was repeated in support of the counterclaim. Order 12 rule 3(a) of C I 47 provides as follows: -
“Application of rules of pleading
3. Without prejudice to the general application of Order 11 to a counterclaim and a defence to counterclaim or to any provision of it which applies to either of those pleadings specifically
(a) rule 1 of this Order shall apply to a counterclaim as if it were a statement of claim and the defendant making it a plaintiff;”
The burden of persu