PAPA GYIMAH GENFI v. DR. J. K. ACQUAYE
2013
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
- MARFUL-SAU, JA (PRESIDING)
- OFOE, JA
- TORKORNOO, JA
Areas of Law
- Property and Real Estate Law
- Evidence Law
- Equity and Trusts
2013
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
The appeal concerns a land dispute where the appellant claimed to be an innocent purchaser of a disputed parcel of land. The High Court had previously declared the appellant's claim invalid, recognizing the respondent's interest, which was supported by possession and previous litigation confirming the fraudulent nature of the purported Deed of Gift. The appellate court upheld the High Court's decision, finding that the appellant had knowledge of the respondent's claim and possession. The appellant's arguments on procedural grounds and the validity of his Land Title Certificate were also dismissed, citing principles that fraud vitiates all transactions and asserting that possession provides a legal basis for a claim to title.
MARFUL-SAU, JA :-
This appeal is taken from the judgment of the High Court dated the 10th of April 2008. In the said judgment the court dismissed the claims of the plaintiff who will be referred to as appellant in this judgment. The trial court then entered judgment for the defendant herein referred to as the respondent on his counterclaim.
The facts of this case are simple. The appellant had purchased the parcel of land the subject of the dispute from one Sarah Korkor Narh, who in turn acquired the land from one Lawyer E. A. Quaye. Lawyer E. A. Quaye claimed that the land was gifted to him by the mother Madam Rebecca Nuamah Dodoo. The appellant as the record indicates was able to register the transaction with her vendor at the Land Title Registry under a certificate number GA 6434.
The respondent on the other hand claimed the land was gifted to her mother, who was the daughter of Madam Rebecca Nuamah Dodoo. The respondent claimed that Lawyer E. A. Quaye who was his uncle forged a Deed of Gift between himself and Madam Rebecca Nuamah Dodoo affecting the land the subject of the dispute. This forged Deed of Gift was dated the 5th of May 1996. The respondent brought an action in the High Court against his uncle and the court declared the Deed of Gift and all transactions arising there from as a nullity.
The appellant’s claim that he was an innocent purchaser without notice was rejected by the trial court, as the court found that the appellant had notice of respondent’s possession of the land. In deed the record revealed that at the time the appellant went onto the land the respondent had constructed a fence wall around the land and stationed one Sule on the land. It is against this judgment that the appeal had been filed.
In the Notice of Appeal two grounds were formulated as follows:-
‘’(i)The judgment is against the weight of evidence.
(ii) The court glossed over the crucial fact that the Appellant was a bona fide purchaser for value without notice.’’
In this appeal I intend to address the first ground as stated above since that ground would take care of the second. It is trite that when an appellant claims that a judgment entered by a trial court is against the weight of evidence adduced at the trial the appellate court is thus empowered to review the trial by re-assessing the evidence on record to ascertain whether the judgment entered by the court could be supported by evidence on record. See TUAKWA v. BOSOM (2001-2002) SCGLR 61.
An appeal is al