REV. SAMUEL KWABENA OFEI v. KWABENA AMOAFO AND TWO OTHERS
1999
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
- WOOD J. A. (PRESIDING)
- BROBBEY J. A.
- ARYEETEY J
Areas of Law
- Property and Real Estate Law
- Evidence Law
- Civil Procedure
- Contract Law
1999
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
The Court of Appeal, per Brobbey J.A., reviewed a land dispute arising from a 1954 grant of virgin forest at Atom on Nkawie and Nyinahin stool lands to ten Akuapem citizens, including the appellant. The appellant cultivated cocoa on his parcel and allowed Kwame Tano (PW1) to farm part; the first respondent initially assisted PW1 and later obtained an abunu tenancy from the Odikro of Atom over the same disputed land, precipitating litigation. The High Court dismissed the appellant’s claim, but on appeal the Court found that the trial judge erred about the appellant’s knowledge of his boundaries, possession, and the applicable evidentiary standard. Boundary owners’ testimony and a 1978 plan supported the appellant; Exhibit 1 lacked weight under Act 122; and reallocation by the successor stool violated nemo dat. The Court unanimously allowed the appeal, declared the appellant entitled to the land, ordered accounts from the first respondent, and granted a perpetual injunction within the terms of the 1954 agreement.
JUDGMENT
BROBBEY J. A.:
This case of the appellant who was the plaintiff at the trial court was that he was one of ten Akuapem citizens who acquired virgin forest in 1954 at a place called Atom on Nkawie and Nyinahin stool lands. The lands were granted to them by Nana Kwasi Duah and Nana Kofi Marfo, chiefs of Nyinahin and Nkawie respectively. They were actually demarcated for them by the chief of pomaakrom with the authority of the chiefs of Nkawie and Nyinahin.
The appellant averred that he developed his portion of the land by making farm and planting cocoa trees. He even gave part of his land to one Kwame Tano testified as PW1.
The appellant described the boundaries of his land by naming his boundary owners. He added that in 1978 a surveyor who demarcated its actual boundaries made a plan of his land for him.
According to the appellant, Kwame Tano said his father had given him land to farm upon. That was in 1981. While working on the land of the appellant before 1981 Kwame Tano used to be assisted by the first respondent. Therefore when Kwame Tano decided to quit the land of the appellant, the first respondent requested to be allowed to continue farming on the land. The requested was granted. It was while he was farming on the land that the dispute arose was that dispute culminated in this litigation.
The respondents in this appeal were the defendants at the trial court. They were three at the time they filed their defence. The third defendant died in the course of the trial. The evidence indicated that the second defendant succeeded him but the record did not show that there was a formal motion for substitution. Since he was not legally substituted, the judgment of the trial court and the judgment in this court bind only the first and second respondents.
The defence of the defendants/respondents was that they admitted that some ten Akuapem citizens acquired some tracks of land at Atom. They however denied in their pleadings that the disputed land was included in the land of the Akuapem people. Rather they averred that the first respondent was found farming on the disputed land. He was queried by one Kwasi Addai, who was then the Odikro of Atom as to how he acquired that land. He explained that the PW1 gave him the land. According to the first respondent, the PW1 had gone to his hometown at Akanten. He therefore went Akanten and called him before the Odikro and his elders and the PW1 then explained that the land was given to him by his (the PW1’s)