NKYI XI vs. KUMAH (BEDU SUBST.)) [1959]DLCA2031

Date	1959-06-25
Suit No.
Citation No.	[1959]DLCA2031

KORSAH C.J.

VAN LARE J.A.

OLLENNU J.

[1959]DLCA2031
																																						<div class="restriction-wrapper">
														<div class="container-lg">
															<div class="row">
																<div class="col-md-12 restricted-content">
																	<div class="restricted-content-img-wrapper">
																		<div class="lock-icon bounce-7">
																			<img class=""
																				src="https://www.dennislawgh.com/dl-assets/dl-images/lock-content.png"
																				alt="Subscription based content">
																		</div>
																	</div>
																	 
																		<a href="https://www.dennislawgh.com/login"
																		class="btn btn-primary btn-lg"
																		style="font-family: 'open sans'; text-transform: capitalize; border-radius: 8px"> 
																		Login to Read Full Case </a>
																	 
																	
																</div>
															</div>
														</div>
													</div>
													<main id="main" class="content" style="min-height: 60rem" ><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:
115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;mso-fareast-font-family:Times;
mso-bidi-font-family:Times;color:#548DD4;mso-themecolor:text2;mso-themetint:
153">NKYI XI<o:p></o:p><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:
115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;mso-fareast-font-family:Times;
mso-bidi-font-family:Times;color:#548DD4;mso-themecolor:text2;mso-themetint:
153">&nbsp;vs. <o:p></o:p><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:
115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;mso-fareast-font-family:Times;
mso-bidi-font-family:Times;color:#548DD4;mso-themecolor:text2;mso-themetint:
153">KUMAH (BEDU SUBST.))<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;[COURT OF APPEAL.]<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[1959] GLR 281<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">

DATE:
25TH JUNE, 1959.<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:&nbsp;&nbsp; <o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in 0in 0in 0in">

<o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>

</div>CORAM:
<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in 0in 0in 0in">

KORSAH C.J., VAN LARE J.A. AND OLLENNU
J.<o:p></o:p>

</div><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>JUDGMENT OF VAN LARE , J.A.<o:p></o:p>The
plaintiff, by his writ of summons issued on the 19th day of June, 1948 in the
Asin Confederacy Native Court “A,” claimed damages for trespass, and an
injunction restraining the defendant, his agents and servants, from entering
upon, or in any way interfering with the plaintiff in his ownership, possession
and occupation of his stool land known as and called Basofi land, situate in
the Asin Apimanim State. The suit was transferred to the Land Court.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The
plaintiff filed a statement of claim averring ownership of the said land by
original settlement on it by his ancestors. The cause of action, as given both
in the writ of summons and in the statement of claim, is that the defendant by
his agents and servants entered upon a portion of the said land in May, 1948,
and constructed a motor road thereon from a village called Nduaso, thereby
damaging existing motorable roads and bridges thereon, and consequently
obstructing the plaintiff’s tenants, James Brodie Apprey and others, engaged in
timber business on that portion of the land.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>In a
statement of defence the defendant admitted committing the acts which the
plaintiff complained of, but pleaded that he committed those acts in the
exercise of his right as owner in possession of the said land acquired by his
ancestors by original settlement.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The
trial-Judge directed himself that upon the pleadings the issue raised for trial
was one of title. In his judgment he found, upon the evidence before him, that
the plaintiff’s ancestors were the first to settle on the land in dispute, and
became by native custom the owners of the land. The assessor who sat with the
learned Judge agreed with the Judge’s findings as to original settlement, and
the effect, according to native law and custom, of that original settlement.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>Upon
those findings of fact, and the declaration of native law and custom, the
learned Judge entered judgment for the plaintiff for declaration of his title
to the land, and damages for trespass.<o:p></o:p>The three
main grounds of appeal argued before us are:<o:p></o:p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt;
margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;border:none;mso-padding-alt:
31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt;mso-border-shadow:yes">(1) the
learned Judge was wrong in making a declaration of title to the land in favour
of the plaintiff when no such relief was asked for or sought;<o:p></o:p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt;
margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;border:none;mso-padding-alt:
31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt;mso-border-shadow:yes">(2) the
plaintiff’s action was misconceived in that not being in possession of the land
in dispute, and his reversionary interest in the land (if any) not having been
infringed, he could not maintain an action for trespass, and<o:p></o:p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt;
margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;border:none;mso-padding-alt:
31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt;mso-border-shadow:yes">(3) the
judgment was against the weight of evidenc</main>