Stephen Obeng Yeboah & Maame Pokuaah v. Nana Apraku Mensah
April 29, 2019
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
- OWUSU, J.A. (PRESIDING)
- DZAMEFE, J.A.
- WELBOURNE, J.A
Areas of Law
- Evidence Law
- Civil Procedure
- Property and Real Estate Law
- Tort Law
April 29, 2019
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
The Court of Appeal, per Mariama Owusu J.A., addressed a boundary dispute over land at Sabronum between the plaintiff/respondent and the defendants/appellants. The plaintiff and his siblings relied on leases (Exhibits A and B) obtained by their late father, Kwasi Avorgah, from Yaw Bredwah and Kofi Donkor, and claimed continuing possession. The 1st defendant, Stephen Obeng Yeboah, traced title to his family predecessor and pointed to boundary features, including pillars marked “KA,” an old timber road, and akonkodie; the 2nd defendant asserted tomato mounds and pillars and recounted failed customary demarcation by the Krontihene of Sabronum. After a survey (Exhibit CE) and trial, the High Court ruled for the plaintiff. On appeal, the Court entertained an additional ground under Rule 8(9) of C.I. 19 and, on rehearing, found that the plaintiff’s land shares a boundary with the 1st defendant, marked by ‘KA1’, ‘KA2’, plaintiff’s second land from Kofi Donkor, and the Aponapono Motor Road. It held the 2nd defendant did not share a boundary or prove her counterclaim, affirmed recovery and trespass damages against her, and set aside the High Court’s judgment as against the 1st defendant.
MARIAMA OWUSU, J.A.
On 21st March, 2017, the High Court, Kumasi gave judgment for the plaintiff against the defendants. The trial court held among other things as follows:
“I therefore hold that the plaintiff have succeeded to prove his case, by the preponderance of probabilities as enshrined in our Evidence Law in Section 11 (4) of Act 323 of 1975. I therefore declare plaintiff ownership to all that piece and parcel of land situate, lying and being at Sabronum on the land, etc.See relief 1 of the docket.
I enter judgment in favour of plaintiff on his relief 1, 2 and 4. I cannot enter judgment for plaintiff on relief 3 since there is no evidence on record to substantiate that relief.”
Dissatisfied with the decision of the High Court, the defendants mounted this appeal on the following grounds:
1. That the judgment is against the weight of evidence.
2. Additional grounds may be filed on receipt of the records of proceedings.
On 26th October, 2017, the defendants filed Additional Ground of Appeal.
That the trial Judge erred when he failed to establish the features marking the boundary between the plaintiff/respondent and the defendants/appellants.
Reliefs being sought:
That the judgment dated 21stMarch, 2017 be set aside and judgment entered for defendants/appellants.
Before dealing with the arguments advanced for and against this appeal, I will give a brief background of this case.
The plaintiff/respondent (hereinafter referred to as plaintiff) issued this writ for himself and on behalf of his brothers and sisters for the following reliefs against the defendants/appellants (hereinafter referred to as 1st and 2nd defendants) jointly and severally for:
a. A declaration that ownership to all that piece and parcel of land situate, lying and being at Sabronum on a land popularly known as Aponaponono and sharing boundaries with the properties of the plaintiff, Afua Konadu, Afua Baah and Sabronum Aponapono Old Motor road
b. Recovery of possession
c. Damages for trespass
d. An Order for Perpetual Injunction restraining the defendants, their servants, agents and any person claiming title through them from interfering with the plaintiff’s property in dispute.
In the 12-paragraph statement of claim which accompanied the writ of summons, the plaintiff averred that his late father Kwasi Avorgah acquired the disputed property from the late Yaw Beredwah and Kofi Donkoh both from Sabronum. The plaintiff averred further that, his late father having acquir