GYETUA vs. BOAFO

The dispute concerned ownership of a cocoa farm on land described by the respondent as Pobriso on Manfo stool land and by the appellant as Akrakosua. The respondent claimed that, after assisting the Manfo stool in earlier litigation, the stool granted him forest land at Pobriso on which he made a cocoa farm. The appellant contended instead that the respondent was his friend and that he merely allocated to him a portion of the appellant’s reserved forest to cultivate under customary permission. The appellant further maintained that he had already successfully litigated title to the same land against the respondent in earlier proceedings, culminating in judgments in his favour. The present action arose after the appellant, relying on that earlier success, removed cocoa from the disputed farm, whereupon the respondent sued for declaration of title and consequential relief. Portion of judgment: “The respondent said that when that action was sub judice, he rendered assistance... he asked and was granted by the stool an area of forest land... He made a cocoa farm on a portion of it... After this judgment... the appellant removed cocoa from his Pobriso farm and thus gave rise to the present action...” and “The appellant’s case is that... it was he who allocated to him a piece of forest land which he had reserved for himself.”

JUDGMENT OF APALOO J.S.C. This is an appeal from the judgment of the High Court, Kumasi (Djabanor J.)1 delivered on 10 January 1962. That judgment reversed the decision of the Kumasi West Local Court which dismissed the claim of the plaintiff-appellant-respondent (hereinafter called the respondent) for a declaration of title to a cocoa farm said to be situate at a place called Pobriso on Manfo stool land. The respondent’s case is far from complex and can be put simply. According to him, about fifteen or sixteen years before he issued the writ, the Manfo stool litigated with the Akwaboa stool on what was described as Manfo lands. The Manfo stool emerged victorious in that litigation. The respondent said that when that action was sub judice, he rendered assistance to the then occupant of the stool by name Boateng. When the action was determined in favour of the Manfo stool, he asked and was granted by the stool an area of forest land which he described as situated at Pobriso. He ma.....