[1979]DLHC1555 • February 26, 1979 • High Court
AMATEI vs. HAMMOND AND ANOTHER
The dispute concerns a building plot at Osu in the Osu Ashanti Blohum Quarter, property of the Osu Mankralo stool. The plaintiff, a subject of the stool, was in physical possession of the land and had constructed a building on it. The defendant also claimed title through the same stool. The plaintiff's claim was based on a grant from Nii Nortey Yeboah, acting mankralo, and elders, while the defendant claimed a grant from the codefendant, the Osu Mankralo. The plaintiff had been farming the land before it was carved into building plots. The defendant alleged a customary grant in 1956 but failed to provide credible evidence. The codefendant was alleged to have been destooled by the Gyasetse, and an acting mankralo appointed, but the destoolment process was flawed.
read moreJUDGMENT OF EDWARD WIREDU J. This is the second trial of this case in this court. The first trial ended around the middle of 1963 and an appeal to the Court of Appeal was allowed and re-trial de novo ordered. The dispute is about a piece of building plot at Osu in the Osu Ashanti Blohum Quarter, the property of the Osu Mankralo stool. The plaintiff on the undisputed facts is a subject of the said stool. At the commencement of the trial he was in physical possession of the land having constructed a building on it. This building on the facts which I accept, was constructed at a time when the defendant’s appeal against the first judgment of this court had been struck out for want of prosecution when, he failed to turn up when the appeal was called for hearing. The facts further show that later the appeal was re-listed and the present trial is the result of the order of that appeal. The defendant also claims to be a subject of the Osu Mankralo stool. Even though issue was joined o.....