THOMPSON v. MENSAH.
January 1, 1957
COURT OF APPEAL
CORAM
- Granville Sharp J.A.
- Ollennu
- Smith JJ
Areas of Law
- Property and Real Estate Law
- Civil Procedure
- Evidence Law
- Equity and Trusts
January 1, 1957
COURT OF APPEAL
CORAM
Try asking the following...
OLLENNU J. In this suit issued on October 20, 1955, the plaintiff claimed a declaration of title to a piece of land situate on Ring Road, Accra; recovery of possession of the said land, mesne profits, and an injunction.
The land is fully described in the writ of summons. The statement of claim, filed on November 11, 1955, contains four paragraphs: in paragraph 2 the plaintiff pleaded that his title to the land was based upon three deeds of conveyance, dated April 26, 1944, May 3, 1944, and March 29, 1945, executed in his favour, as to the first, by. one Halm Owoo, and as to the second and third, by one J. Kofi Parry. On February 15, 1956, the plaintiff filed an amendment to his statement of claim wherein he pleaded that his vendors, the said Halm Owoo and J. Kofi Parry, derived their title from the I{orle Webii. In paragraph 3 he averred that the defendant had erected buildings on the said land in spite of being warned of the pHiintiff's title to it.
By his statement of defence filed on November 16, 1955, as amended on November 30, 1955, the defendant pleaded that he entered upon the land under a grant by the Atukpai family, and that he was in negotiations with the Rorle Webii .to perfect his ownership. In the summons for directions, filed on November 22, 1955, the plaintiff asked for an order that the only issue to be tried was: "That the vendor [I think he means each of his vendors] derives his title from the Rorle \Vebii, the proper owners of the land in question."
Upon an order made by the Land Court, on November 30, 1955, in consequence of an amendment to the statement of defence, the plaintiff, on January 31, 1956, filed a fresh summons for directions setting down the following as the only issue for trial, namely: "That at what time defendant bought his land from the said Korle Webii since the plaintiff and the defendant derive their title from the same vendors." In short the issue raised on the pleadings is whether the plaintiff acquired title to the land under the deeds pleaded.
Hearing of the case commenced on October 11, 1956. Counsel for the plaintiff opened the case in the following words:
" We have documents showing our title to the land; also show documents of our vendor; covered by Golightly v. Ashrifi (1); hold defendant's vendor no right; also pleads land granted to him for farms."
The evidence given by the plaintiff at the trial was very short. It is as follows, leaving out the formal parts:
" I bought land plots on Ring Road.
AI Generated Summary
This appeal concerns a land dispute on Accra’s Ring Road. The plaintiff, relying on three conveyances from 1944–45 by vendors Halm Owoo and J. Kofi Parry said to derive from the Korle We, sought title, possession, mesne profits and an injunction. The defendant asserted entry under an Atukpai family grant and negotiations with the Korle We, and was in possession. At trial, the plaintiff’s vendors tendered 31 October 1956 “confirmation” deeds by an Acting Gbese Mantse, but these were unpleaded and, substantively, void for noncompliance with statutory consents. Applying the Kokomlemle Consolidated principles, the court held that outright alienation required prior consent of the Ga and Gbese Stools and Korle We, and concurrence of families in occupation, notably the Kotey family who held a defined portion. The Korle Priest’s alienations failed those requirements. Forfeiture was rejected under native custom and equity due to acquiescence. Because the plaintiff was not in possession and lacked title, the defendant’s possession prevailed. The appeal was dismissed, with two judges concurring.