1960
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
The court dismissed the fifth claimant's ownership claim of the acquired land, reaffirming the possession claims of the first, second, third, and fourth claimants. The fifth claimant's failure to prove a superior title resulted in compensation being awarded to the other claimants, along with cost allocations.
(His lordship stated the respective claims and continued): Section 14 of the Public Lands Ordinance, Cap. 134 reads as follows:
"In all cases where any question shall arise respecting the title to any lands to be acquired under this Ordinance the parties in possession of such lands as being the owners thereof at the time of such lands being purchased or taken, shall be deemed to have been lawfully entitled to such lands, unless the contrary be shown to the satisfaction of the Court, and such parties shall be entitled to receive the purchase money or compensation for such lands, but without prejudice to any subsequent proceedings against such parties at the instance of any person having or alleging a better right thereto."
The section raises a presumption of ownership in favour of persons in possession at the date of the acquisition; and places a burden upon any claimant not in such possession to prove a better title to the satisfaction of the court: Adjin III and Another v. Onano V and Another (14 W.A.C.A 472) and Adjin II v. Obadsen II and Another (14 W.A.C.A. 649).
The fifth claimant as pointed out above, admits he was not in physical possession of any portion of the land at the time of the acquisition, and there is not a title of evidence on the record that he was. The onus is therefore upon him to satisfy the court that title to the land was vested in him at the day of the acquisition, and that the persons in physical possession at the time of the acquisition were his tenants and licensees. At a very early stage of the proceedings and on many occasions during the course of the proceedings this onus was forcefully brought to his notice by the court. But all the evidence he tendered in support of his allegation that the Manya Krobos in possession were his tenants and licensees is: firstly, a half-hearted allegation that the third claimant used to give corn and firewood to his, the fifth claimant's family in acknowledgement of his family's ownership of the land; and secondly, evidence [p.82] led by him and his witness that the third claimant and two of his people had obtained permission from him through the Konor of Yilo Krobo, to make a road from their village which is near to the eastern boundary of the land acquired, to join the Accra-Senkyi road, which is some distance away and that upon making the said road the third claimant and his people had reserved for him all trees felled along the course of the road and all stumps of trees dug up, and tha