Try asking the following...
JUDGMENT
JUDGMENT
Plaintiff claims against the defendants is for; (a) declaration that plaintiff is entitled to a
portion of that piece of land situate and lying at a place commonly known and called
“Ankase” at Akoase which the first defendant has purportedly sold to the 2nd defendant.
(b) Recovery of possession of the plaintiff’s share of the land. (c) Declaration that the
purported sale of the said land by the 1st defendant to the 2nd is unlawful and costs.
The case of the plaintiff is that he is a Carpenter and the first defendant a retired nurse.
The second defendant is the manager of the Dumpong Rural Bank. The plaintiff contends,
his father is the brother of the first defendant. It was the contention of the plaintiff that
his late grandfather Opanin Aye Kofi owned the property in contention. Opanin Aye Kofi
in his life time had four children. One of his uncles is dead leaving the 1st defendant and
the brother at Tarkwa. Following the demise of Aye Kofi his four children ought to have
a share of the property in contention. Two of the siblings are dead leaving the defendant
and her brother at Tarkwa in the Western Region of Ghana.
Plaintiff submits as Akuapims they inherit patrilinealy for which reason he is entitled to
his father’s share of the land in contention. Plaintiff maintains without his knowledge
and consent, first defendant purportedly sold the land to the 2nd defendant hence that the
sale must be set aside.
The defense of the defendants was that, second defendant is the manager of the
Dumpong Rural Bank PLC Asakraka. The Dumpong Rural Bank operates a branch office
at Akoase in a rented apartment and therefore decided to look for a plot of land to build
an office for itself, hence approached Opanin Yaw Opare for a parcel of land to be used
for the purpose. The plaintiff’s father Yaw Opare was the head of family then who leased
for consideration half of the land to the Bank. Later the first defendant who is the aunt of
the plaintiff also sold the leasehold of the remaining half plot to the Bank as the initial
half bought was too small for the project. The two half plots were merged to one plot and
a site plan made to cover it. It is the contention of the defendants that the plaintiff of
these transactions at the time but did not protest. The land in contention is part of the
Akoase stool lands and so the family of Aye Kofi directed the Bank to the stool for
documentation. An indenture of the lease was prepared and was even