2021
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
The Ghana Court of Appeal, per Anthony Oppong, J.A., reviewed an appeal by Alhaji Mohammed Tanko from a Circuit Court judgment that granted Yamaha Ama Kwabua title and injunction over Plot No. 111 in New Juabeng. Yamaha’s lease from the Lands Commission (ER. 518/79) and acts of possession (caretaker Leo Kofi cultivating sugarcane) were contrasted with Tanko’s asserted grant from Nana Antwi Adjei and his challenge to government vesting. On appeal, Tanko abandoned weight-of-evidence analysis and attacked Yamaha’s capacity, claimed she had died before suit, challenged the substituted plaintiff’s power of attorney, raised joinder irregularity, highlighted name misspellings, and relied on a missing document (Exhibit R) evidencing a grant from Nana Kwaku Twum. The Court of Appeal held Yamaha remained the legal lessee because the purported gift lacked written assignment and consent, she was alive when the writ issued, Exhibit A met statutory requirements and was admitted without objection, any joinder irregularity was waived, name discrepancies were immaterial, and Exhibit R would not alter the outcome given nemo dat. The appeal was dismissed, with Sowah, J.A. and Mensah-Homiah, J.A. concurring.
ANTHONY OPPONG, J.A.
In 1997, one Yamaha Ama Kwabua caused a writ of summons to issue against the 1st defendant at the Circuit Court, Koforidua. While the matter was pending, the plaintiff died and since the cause of action survived her, by an application filed somewhere in the year 2000 one Victoria Acheampong substituted for the deceased plaintiff. The reliefs plaintiff sought were declaration of title to all that piece or parcel of land situate at Sector 3, Block 1, Plot No. 111 in the New Juabeng District covering an approximate area of 0.37 acres and bounded by Plot Nos. 112, 109/110 and an open space and perpetual injunction against the defendant and his privies.
The factual basis of plaintiff’s claim as gleaned from the record was that in 1979 her husband acquired the land from the Lands Commission, Koforidua who prepared a lease that was duly registered as ER. 518/79 in her favour. Then somewhere in 1986, one Mr. B. A. Bediako alleged that plaintiff’s acquired land covered a portion of his land and demanded compensation and plaintiff consequently paid compensation to the said Bediako.
Plaintiff, as an act of possession and ownership of the said land, put one Leo Kofi on the land as his caretaker. Leo Kofi planted sugar cane and other crops on the land and remained in possession until defendant entered the land. And the protests to defendant’s entry unto the land culminated in the suit.
Alhaji Mohammed Tanko, the Defendant, on the other hand, claimed to have acquired the land from Nana Antwi Adjei who was subsequently joined to the suit as second defendant. He claimed that in 1979, the disputed land had not been demarcated into plots and so the grant of the land to plaintiff by the Lands Commission was void, more so because the land is not Government land. The defendant insisted that he had not committed any act of trespass since his entry on the land was premised on legitimate and lawful acquisition of the land from the real owners.
Defendant counterclaimed for declaration of title to the same Plot No. 111; an order for recovery of possession and perpetual injunction and dismissal of plaintiff’s claim.
It may be observed that one pertinent issue that emanated from the respective cases of the parties was whether the land is vested in Government of Ghana or it belonged to the 2nd defendant’s family from whom 1st defendant acquired the land. To this crucial issue the trial Court rightly, in our view, found that defendant in the trial conceded th