Try asking the following...
JUDGMENT
YAW APPAU, J.A.
On the 22nd day of June 2009, the appellant herein by name Opanin Pobee who does described himself as the “Tufuhene elect” of Apam, filed a motion for judicial review vide Order 55 rule 1 (a) of the High Court Civil Procedure Rules, 2004
Ebusuapanyin Kojo Yoyoo, as plaintiff issued a writ of summons against Supi Kobina Ogyam, Supi Kobena Sekyi and Opanyin Opobi alias Bentum before the Judicial Committee of the Gomoa Akyeampim Traditional Council, Gomoa Assin. In his writ of summons he claimed for a declaration that:
i) The 5 sections of the Kakaba Anona Family headed by plaintiff are the sole authority to install a Tufuhene for Apam.
ii) The purported acts of confinement of 3rd defendant and his intended installations are unlawful.
iii) General damages for unlawful usurpation of plaintiff’s rights.
iv) Perpetual injunction restraining defendant, their agents, servants, assigns etc from interfering with plaintiffs said rights.
The gist of his case, and this can be gathered from his statement of case, is that he is the head of the Kokoben Asona Family of Apam and it is this family that has the sole authority to install the Tufuhene from Apam. Whilst the immediate past head is yet to be buried and a new one installed the 1st and 2nd defendants have connived to nominate and confine the 3rd defendant intending to install him as Tufuhene and this they are doing with the connivance of the Chief of Apam.
Supi Kobina Ogyam, Supi Kobina Sekyi and Opanin Opobi (alias Bentum) as 1st, 2nd and 3rd defendants respectively filed a joint defence. I must mention here that even though there were certain inconsistencies in the facts as averred in their defence, rid of these inconsistencies and the historical details, the substance of their defence is that Plaintiff has no capacity to issue the writ. It is their case that the overall head of the Kakaben Anona family is Opanyin Kofi Acquah. It is he who has the right to nominate a candidate for the Tufuhene and he had done so electing the 3rd defedant with the consent of the two Asafo Companies. Paragraph 20 of their defence speaks for itself.
“Defendants aver that the instant case, 3rd defendant was nominated by Ebusuapanyin Kofi Acquah, was presented to the 2 Asafo companies for acceptance after which he was sent to the chief of Apam for cross-examination which involves his curriculum vitae and after that he was accepted by the Chief of the town”.
I believe these two Asafo companies are those that Pl