Try asking the following...
The following judgments were delivered :-
DEANE, C.]. THE GOLD COAST COLONY.
This is an appeal by the plaintiff in the Court below from a judgment of Howes, J. in favour of the respondent Bekyire Yankah II as representative of the Stool of Dutch Sekondi. The relevant facts may be shortly stated. By a deed dated 20th October, 1920, purporting to be made between one Kwesi Miyewden and Ohene Segu Winwah II his elders and councillors and vendors and the plaintiff as purchaser, the vendors in consideration of the sum of £400 purported to convey to the use of the purchaser his heirs and assigns for ever a plot of land at Dutch Sekondi. The plot of land in question it is admitted was at the tirI1e of the alleged sale the property of the Stool of Dutch Sekondi, and as such could be sold by the Stool, but Kwesi Miyewden being in occupation of it with the consent of the Stool and having built a house on it, it was recognised that he had an equity in the land and it was therefore thought necessary that he should join in the conveyance. The plaintiff having as he thought bought the land from the Stool with the consent of Miyewden, and having no particular use for it at the time, did not, it seems, take the trouble to obtain possession of it from Miyewden but left him in occupation of his house on the land. Sometime in 1928, however, the plaintiff determined to build upon the land: he therefore visited the plot and inspected it, together with an adjoining lot which was also his property, and informed Miyewden of his intention requesting him to give up possession. To his surprise Miyewden refused alleging that he had never sold the land to him.
Plaintiff thereupon took action against Miyewden to recover possession of the land, but on the action coming on before Howes, J. the learned Judge held that the plot was sold without the knowledge and consent of Miyewden ; that his name had been inserted in the deed without his knowledge and that the transaction was fraudulent; he ordered that the sale should be set aside and the deed of conveyance impounded. Against that judgment the plaintiff did not appeal, but brought this action against the first defendant, the present occupant of the Stool of Dutch Sekondi, and therefore the representative of the Stool, and against Ephraim who had taken a prominent part in the sale to him of the plot of land, to recover the £400 the purchase money which he alleged he had paid for the plot and to which accordingly he was entitled as the