ADJEI vs. ACQUAH AND OTHERS

The plaintiff, head of the Kona family of Egyaa No. 1 near Anomabu, claimed title to a parcel of land called 'Apakye' near Ekurabadze, seeking declaration of title, damages for trespass, and an injunction. The plaintiff's claim was based on traditional history and evidence from adjoining boundary owners, asserting ancestral grant of the land by Anamuah and Apprenkumah to his ancestors, Yeboah and Buawa, with supporting acts of possession. The defendants denied this, presenting a conflicting traditional history asserting their own ancestral rights and denying the plaintiff's claim to Apakye land. The trial court found in favor of the plaintiff, but the Court of Appeal reversed, preferring the defendants' traditional history. The Supreme Court reviewed the evidence, including traditional accounts and acts of ownership, and found the plaintiff's possession and boundary evidence sufficient to establish title.

JUDGMENT OF AIKINS J.S.C. The plaintiff in this case, a head of the Kona family of Egyaa No. 1 near Anomabu, claimed against the defendants for a declaration of title to a parcel of land called “Apakye” near Ekurabadze, damages for trespass and an injunction. He obtained judgment at the trial court, but this judgment was set aside by the Court of Appeal. Aggrieved by the decision of the Court of Appeal the plaintiff has now appealed to this court. Two grounds of appeal were filed, namely: (a). By the accomplished or established facts the plaintiff’s version of the traditional history is the most probable and should be preferred to the defendants’ version. (b). The plaintiff’s possession of the land in dispute is acknowledged by the adjoining boundary owners who testified for the plaintiff. The plaintiff’s case in the High Court centred on traditional history and evidence of adjoining owners. He claims that his ancestors, Yeboah and his sister Buawa of the Kona clan, em...