[1960]DLHC136 • January 20, 1960 • High Court
DODOO vs. GYANSA AND ANOTHER
The dispute concerned ownership of land transferred by customary methods. The plaintiff claimed ownership through his late mother who allegedly purchased the land for £4 from Kwamin Akyinabo. The defendants claimed the first defendant purchased the land for £10, supported by Kwamin Akyinabo's evidence. The plaintiff had exercised acts of ownership over the land, including converting a building and collecting rents from tenants and the local council from about 1939 until shortly before the suit in 1959.
read more(His Lordship referred to the facts and continued). It seems to me that proof of the ownership of the land need not be restricted to the evidence of the vendor or to that of eye-witnesses at the sale. It is the exception rather than the rule that, at the time of litigation about land which has been transferred by methods of customary transfer, the original owner and vendor (and the witnesses to the transaction) are alive to tell the tale. In my experience, it is evidence (if such be available) of the exercise of acts of ownership over the property during the material years, which has served as a beacon-light to guide the courts in determining ownership. So in United Products Ltd. v. Afari and Others (Div. Ct. 1929-31, p. 12) Deane, C.J. said: “The probabilities of the case and the evidence of possession strongly support the claimant’s story and I do not consider that the fact that she has not called an eye-witness who was present when the gift was made is ipso facto suff...