OPANIN MANUKURE SAMPONG AND OTHERS v. OPANIN KWAKU AMPADU AND OTHERS
1999
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
- ESSILFIE-BONDZIE, JA. (PRESIDING)
- AMONOO-MONNEY, JA.
- OWUSU-ANSAH, JA
Areas of Law
- Property and Real Estate Law
- Probate and Succession
1999
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
The case revolves around whether properties acquired by Opanin Daaku before his enstoolment as Gyasewahene should be treated as family or stool properties. The trial court initially held these properties as stool properties, but the appellate court overturned this decision, asserting that they should be family properties. The appellate court also confirmed the capacity of the plaintiffs to sue, as the removal of the head of family was not conducted according to customary procedures.
JUDGMENT
ESSILFIE-BONDZIE, JA.
This appeal is from the decision of the High Court Koforidua, contained in the judgment of Her Lordship Mrs. Justice Adinyira dated 15th October 1996. The plaintiffs issued a writ against the defendants claiming as head of family and principal members respectively of the Kwaku Daaku Asona family of Abetifi declaration of title to parcels of land described as lots 1-8 endorsed on the Writ of Summons, recovery of possession of lots 1-8 endorsed on the writ, perpetual injunction restraining the defendants, their servants etc from entering or interfering with the properties and an account of monies in rents etc from 21st October 1991 to date of judgment.
The undisputed fact in this case is that all the plaintiffs and all the defendants are members of the Daaku Asona family of Kwaaman and Abetifi. The parties do not dispute the fact that the Adonten Stool of Kwahu ie the then Abetifihene created a Black Stool for the Daaku Asona Family. The said substool created was called Gyasewa Stool of Abetifi. It is also agreed that Opanin Daaku was the second occupant of the Gyasewa Stool. Opanin Daaku was succeeded as Gyasewahene by the 1st defendant (now deceased), followed by the late Baffour Okyere Sampong and presently by the 2nd defendant. It is not disputed that all the properties forming the subject matter in dispute with the exception of lot 3 were self–acquired by Opanin Daaku before he became the Gyasewahene. Lot 3 a farm at Takyikrom was acquired by the 1st defendant when he was the occupant of the Gyasewa Stool.
The evidence and pleadings show that the 1st plaintiff brought the action on behalf of himself as head of the Asona Family and on behalf of the immediate members of the Daaku Asona Family of Abetifi, Kwahu and Kwaaman Ashante. The plaintiffs contended that the occupant of the Gyasewa stool does not at the same time succeed to Opanin Daaku’s self-acquired property. In other words they claimed that the defendants cannot lay claim to the properties in dispute since they were the self-acquired property of Opanin Daaku.
In their defense, the defendants challenged the capacity of the plaintiffs to institute the action. Thus in paragraph 2 of the statement of defense, they pleaded
“(2) Paragraph 1 of the statement of claim is not admitted on the ground that the 1st plaintiff is not the Head of the Asona Family of Abetifi and Kwaaman. Consequently all the plaintiffs lack the necessary capacity to institute this action.”
I