2022
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
This appeal concerns ownership of property No. D10/2 in the Central Business Area of Sunyani, originally acquired and developed by Abraham Ntow, who died intestate around 1958. The Mpeasem (Mempeasem) Family of Berekum claimed that the property devolved to them under matrilineal customary law. The appellant, Rev. Nana Adjei Ntow, contended that the deceased had gifted the property inter vivos to his son, Alexander Kwame Ntow, and that Alexander had later gifted portions to his children, enabling the appellant to buy his sister’s share and assert exclusive control. In 2003 the family appointed Alexander as caretaker and, with him, executed a Joint Building Project Agreement with King George Arthur on a build-and-share basis. The appellant subsequently obtained a consent judgment in a suit against Alexander and procured a lease from the Lands Commission; he sued tenants for eviction, while the family sued him and Alexander, challenging his title, the consent judgment, and the lease. The High Court consolidated the suits, upheld the family’s title, set aside the consent judgment for fraud and collusion, and declared the lease void. On appeal, the Court of Appeal affirmed, finding no merit in the grounds and concluding the property devolved on the family, the gift claim was unproven, the consent judgment was collusive and fraudulent, and the lease invalid under nemo dat.
RICHARD ADJEI-FRIMPONG JA:
At the center of the two consolidated suits now on appeal before us lies the question of ownership of property No. D10/2, Central Business Area, Sunyani. At the time material to the dispute, the property was made up of a commercial storey building and an undeveloped portion of land with an old structure thereon.
The original ownership of the property appears common ground. A certain Abraham Ntow @ M’agya Ntow, whom we shall conveniently refer to as “the deceased” acquired the plot of land and put on it a dwelling house.
The deceased died some time in 1958 and the fact that he died intestate is also not in any doubt. How the property was supposed to have devolved upon his death has been the point of controversy in this trial.
The commercial portion of the property, as the facts show, is of recent development. Some time in 2003, the Mpeasem Family of Berekum to which the deceased allegedly belonged to and on which the property had supposedly devolved, went into an agreement with one King George Arthur (and his two sons) to develop the commercial portion on a “build and share basis”. The implementation of the agreement, referred to as “Joint Building Project Agreement” appears to have sparked of a litany of law suits including the instant ones.
According to the appellant now before us, who was the plaintiff in the 1st suit and 1st defendant in the 2nd suit, the deceased in his lifetime made a gift inter vivos of the property to his only son Alexander Kwame Ntow. Alexander Kwame Ntow, the appellant’s father, was the 2nd defendant in the 2nd suit. He died in the course of the proceedings at the court below. It does not appear that he was substituted.
The appellant had also claimed that the deceased was a Guan and that contrary to the claim of the respondents, he never belonged to their Mpeasem family of Berekum. For the appellant, even if there was no gift by the deceased to the son, Guan, being a patrilineal society, the property still devolved on Alexander Kwame Ntow, the only surviving son of the deceased at the time.
On the other hand, the respondents herein, claim the deceased was a member of their Mpeasem family of Berekum and that on his death intestate, the property devolved on the matrilineal family at the time.
Now, how did the litigations ensue?
The appellant commenced the 1st suit against four sitting tenants occupying various shops in the commercial portion of the property. He claimed to be the owner of the prope