SETH ADJETEY SOWAH VS ISRAEL ADJEI OKPOTI

Plaintiff’s case

By a writ of summons issued on 5th June 2012, the plaintiff claimed the following reliefs against the defendant:

i. A declaration that the defendant is not the head of family of the Atwei Afia family also known as Sowah family of Samsam.

ii. An order of account directed at the defendant to account for all the family property unlawfully misappropriated by the defendant without the consent of the principal elders.

iii. An order of perpetual injunction restraining the defendant from holding himself out as the head of family of the Atwei Afia family also known as the Sowah family.

iv. Costs.

It is the plaintiff’s case that he is a principal member of the Sowah family also known as the Atwei Afia family of Samsam, Medie, Accra and he has brought this action out 2

of necessity to protect the family properties from being depleted. He asserted that the Sowah family are the allodial owners of a large tract of land situate at Samsam.

The plaintiff asserted that since the death of Nee Amaneamahu of Samsam who was the head of the Sowah family, the family has not nominated and appointed anybody as head of family but the defendant has in recent times been holding himself out as the head of family. In that assumed capacity, the defendant has arrogated to himself the power of dealing with family lands, including distribution of the family land amongst family members and alienating the family land to purchasers for valuable consideration without the consent of the principal members of the family. The defendant, acting in his assumed role as family head, also claimed compensation from Ghana Telecom in respect of some of their family lands that had been encroached upon by Ghana Telecom but he failed to render accounts to the family in respect of the said compensation he received on behalf of the family.

The plaintiff asserted that the acts of the defendant with respect to the family lands without the consent of the principal members of the family is null and void and of no legal effect and should be set aside. The plaintiff further asserted that the defendant will continue acting unlawfully as head of family unless restrained by the court. The plaintiff therefore instituted this action claiming the reliefs listed above.

Defendant’s defence

In a statement of defence filed on his behalf, the defendant denied the plaintiff’s assertions. The defendant asserted that the plaintiff is not a principal member of the family and he generally challenged the c