TOGBE KONDA AND ANOTHER v. TOGBE DOMPRE V
1978
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
- SOWAH
- KINGSLEY-NYINAH
- ANNAN JJ.A
Areas of Law
- Civil Procedure
- Administrative Law
- Property and Real Estate Law
1978
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
Annan J.A. delivered the ruling in an appeal concerning a traditional land boundary dispute between Leklebi Agbesia and Logba Vuinta. The plaintiffs-appellants, acting as divisional chief and regent of Leklebi Agbesia, sued on behalf of their community asserting title to the disputed land; the defendants-respondents, including Togbe Dompre V of Logba Vuinta, relied on a 1905 German Administration boundary and Dr. Grunner’s map, with survey exhibit C labeling areas as Agbesia or Vuinta property. On appeal, appellants argued that by the time the trial court delivered judgment, section 4 of the Stool Lands Boundaries Settlement Decree, 1973 (N.R.C.D. 172) had ousted its jurisdiction. The Court of Appeal held the dispute fell within the Decree’s extended definitions of “boundary” and “stool land,” and, following Agyei II v. Abudulai, concluded that proceedings pending for judgment at the Decree’s commencement were void. The preliminary objection was upheld and the appeal allowed.
JUDGMENT OF ANNAN J.A.
Annan J.A. delivered the ruling of the court. At the hearing of this appeal counsel for the appellants took a preliminary point, namely, that at the date when judgment was delivered by the trial court its jurisdiction had been taken away by section 4 of the Stool Lands Boundaries Settlement Decree, 1973 (N.R.C.D. 172), and this notwithstanding that the trial court had jurisdiction at the commencement of the proceedings and up to the date that judgment was reserved. The Decree came into force after judgment had been reserved but before it was delivered. The submission is that the trial court had no jurisdiction to make the determination that it did in the judgment.
The action was brought by the plaintiffs-appellants as divisional chief and regent respectively of Leklebi Agbesia "for and on behalf of the people of Leklebi Agbesia the owners since time immemorial of the land in dispute." The first defendant-respondent was sued as Togbe Dompre V of Logba Vuinta and the other two defendants are from Logba Vuinta. Although the defendants-respondents did not in terms claim the land for the people of Logba Vuinta in their statement of defence they did in paragraph (5) thereof assert a boundary settled in 1905 by the German Administration "between the Leklebis, the Logbas and the Logba Totas." The paramount issue settled for trial was "whether or not [p.356] the land, the subject-matter of the dispute is the property of the people of Leklebi Agbesia.”
It is clear from the evidence of both sides at the trial that what was in dispute between them was the correct position of the traditional boundary between the people of Leklebi Agbesia and the Logbas, each side placing great reliance on old maps as to those boundaries and drawing also on traditional evidence as to original migration from Norchie. Both the plaintiffs-appellants and the defendants-respondents saw it that way, the case was conducted on that basis and judgment given on the matter of the boundary between the two areas, i.e. Leklebi Agbesia and Logba Vuinta. The plan exhibit C made on the instruction of both parties shows that the various areas pointed out to the surveyor were shown either as “Agbesia peoples’ property” or as “Vuinta peoples’ property.”
The trial judge himself attached considerable significance to the point that the traditional areas of the Leklebi Agbesias (the plaintiffs), the Logba Vuintas (the defendants), the Logba Totas and the Ves who inhabit the region