SAMPSON OBENG KWAME MENSAH v. KWABENA MENSAH
2019
SUPREME COURT
GHANA
CORAM
- GBADEGBE, JSC (PRESIDING)
- BENIN, JSC
- APPAU, JSC
- PWAMANG, JSC
- KOTEY, JSC
Areas of Law
- Civil Procedure
- Probate and Succession
- Property and Real Estate Law
2019
SUPREME COURT
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
In a Supreme Court appeal, the Court reviewed a Court of Appeal decision that varied reliefs related to the beneficial enjoyment of a disputed property originally owned by Opanyin Kwabena Asare. The Court of Appeal included the children and descendants of both Opanyin Kwasi Sarfo and Opanyin Kwadwo Gyebi as beneficial owners, a decision upheld by the Supreme Court with some corrections. The Court found that the evidence overwhelmingly supported the Court of Appeals decision and rejected the defendants' counterclaim and their assertion that the property was exclusively theirs. The order of restraint against the defendants was appropriately maintained to avoid interference with the rightful occupants. The Court emphasized the legislative powers of appellate courts and affirmed the procedural correctness in considering appeals beyond grounds raised by parties.
GBADEGBE: JSC
We have before us in the exercise of our appellate jurisdiction, an appeal from the judgment of the Court of Appeal (CA) by which the decision of the trial High Court was varied in part. In the judgment on appeal to us, the learned justices agreed with the lower court’s findings of fact but varied the consequential awards. While the variation of relief 2 relating to an order of perpetual injunction was essentially a different formulation of that which was granted by the trial court, relief 1 was varied in substance to include children and descendants of the plaintiff’s uncle- Opanyin Kwadwo Gyebi. The variation to the order made regarding relief 2 inserted the words; “the children of Opanyin Kwadwo Gyebi and their descendants” to the persons whose beneficial interest in the disputed property was acknowledged in the judgment of the trial court. Following the said judgment, the defendants/ appellants/ appellants (defendants) launched the instant appeal seeking a variation of the judgment in their favor. For reasons of convenience, in these proceedings the plaintiff/respondent/respondent will bear the description of plaintiff.
In the notice of appeal, the defendants attacked the judgment of the CA on the following grounds:
1. The judgment is against the weight of the evidence.
2. The Court of Appeal was wrong in declaring the children of Opanyin Kwasi Sarfo and their descendants, the children of Opanyin Kwadwo Gyebi and their descendants are beneficiary owners of House No 27, Block 6, Old Tafo, Kumasi.
3. The Court of Appeal erred in restraining the Defendants/ Appellants/ Appellants and or Agona Petenyinase family and their respective privies, assigns, workmen and anybody claiming in trust for them from interfering with the beneficiaries’ occupation and use of House No 27, Block 6, Old Tafo, Kumasi.
4. The Plaintiff was not entitled to judgment against the Petenyinase family or the family of Opanyin Kwadwo Gyebi.
5. The Defendants were not the proper persons to be sued or to be continued as Defendants in respect of the Suit.
6. The Plaintiff was not entitled to judgment on the reliefs he was granted upon the requisite standard of proof or at all.
A brief statement of the background to the action herein is stated as follows. During his life time, Opanyin Kwabena Asare was married to one Abena Tiwaah with whom he had two children, Opanyin Kwasi Sarfo and Opanyin Kwadwo Gyebi. He also acquired the disputed property in which he lived