ANI & ORS. vs. AMOH [1959]DLHC1989

Date	1959-05-06
Suit No.
Citation No.	[1959]DLHC1989

OLLENNU J.

DA ROCHA FOR THE APPELLANTS.

ACHIAMPONG FOR THE RESPONDENT.

[1959]DLHC1989
																																						<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">ANI &amp; ORS. <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">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">AMOH<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;[HIGH COURT (LANDS DIVISION), ACCRA]<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 214<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:
6TH MAY, 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">

DA ROCHA
FOR THE APPELLANTS.<o:p></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">

OLLENNU J.<o:p></o:p>

</div><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>JUDGMENT OF OLLENNU J.<o:p></o:p>This is
an appeal from a judgment of the Akyem Abuakwa Native Court “A” delivered on
the 12th day of February, 1957.<o:p></o:p>The claim
was as follows:<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">“The
plaintiffs are joint owners of all that piece or parcel of land situate, lying
and being at Kronkronso Begoro, and bounded on one side by Kwakoi’s property,
on one side by Forest Reserve, on one side by Begoro-Werobeng foot path and
other other side by Forest Reserve. That defendant has been disturbing the
occupation of plaintiffs by indiscriminate removal of foodstuffs etc. from the
above described land without the plaintiffs’ due permission, knowledge and
consent and therefore claims £100 damages for such trespass. The plaintiffs
further claim an order of the Court for perpetual Injunction restraining the
defendant, his agents, labourers and workmen from further entry into the land
to abate future trespass.”<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>It is
common ground between the parties that some thirty or more years ago two groups
of people, namely, the appellants’ group from Mampong and the respondent’s
group from Larteh, jointly purchased a large piece of land from the Ohene of
Begoro, who is the Bumkuhene of Akyem Abuakwa. Subsequently, the land sold to
them was declared a forest reserve area, and another piece of land, of which
the land described in the Writ of Summons forms a part, was given to the two
groups in replacement of the former piece. Thereupon the fourth (4th)
appellant, a surveyor, acting upon instructions given to him by one Adufo, a
duly authorised representative of all the purchasers, apportioned the land
among the purchasers and demarcated the share of each one of him.<o:p></o:p>The
Mampong group were dissatisfied with the division and requested that the land
be re-apportioned; they then went upon the portion already given to the
respondent, for the purpose of the re-apportionment, but before then the
respondent had already cultivated his said portion into farms. The respondent
took action for trespass against those who so entered upon his portion of land,
including the appellants in this case; but he lost the action both in the
Native Court and in the Land Court. In dismissing the respondent’s appeal
Korsah Ag. C.J. (as a he then was) concluded his judgement as follows:-<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">“In my
view the representatives of the purchasers were entitled to enter the land with
a surveyor to demarcate it for the purpose of sharing it according to each
person’s contribution. In so doing, they did not commit any trespass. If there
had been evidence of wanton damage the plaintiff might have been entitled to
recover the value of the property so damaged. In fact no evidence of damage was
adduced”.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>Earlier,
he had found that the members of purchasing parties did not contribute equal
amounts towards the purchase price, and that the re-sharing of the land was
agreed to by the respondents.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The Akyem
Abuakwa Native Court </main>