NKUM vs. ANDOH & ANOR [1959]DLHC2030

Date	1959-10-30
Suit No.
Citation No.	[1959]DLHC2030

ADUMUA-BOSSMAN J.

PUPLAMPU FOR PLAINTIFF (NKUM)

BENJAMIN (JR.) (FOR SEKYI) FOR DEFENDANTS.

[1959]DLHC2030
																																						<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">NKUM<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">ANDOH &amp; ANOR<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;[HIGH COURT (LANDS DIVISION), CAPE COAST.]<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 358<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:
30TH OCTOBER, 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">

PUPLAMPU
FOR PLAINTIFF (NKUM)<o:p></o:p>

BENJAMIN
(JR.) (FOR SEKYI) FOR DEFENDANTS.<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">

ADUMUA-BOSSMAN J.<o:p></o:p>

</div><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>JUDGMENT OF ADUMUA-BOSSMAN J.<o:p></o:p>(His
lordship referred to the history of the case, examined the evidence of the
plaintiff and his witnesses, and continued: -)<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>From the
foregoing examination of the evidence of the plaintiff and his two witnesses,
it appears sufficiently clear that the sum-total of it falls very far short of
establishing title. The trial-Court, in the light of that evidence alone and
without regard even to the defendant’s evidence, was amply justified in finding
that the plaintiff had failed to prove that title to the land on which his
claim to recovery of possession necessarily depended.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>But even
if the plaintiff’s family did have title to the land at all (which was
strenuously denied by the defendant), it seems to me that, in any event, the
admissions of the plaintiff and his two witnesses establish two situations, in
either of which he is legally precluded from maintaining his claim. These admissions
establish, as the first of these two situations, estoppel by acquiescence of
conduct, in that the defendant’s family were allowed to obtain adverse
possession of the parcel of land in dispute, as against the family of the
plaintiff, and have been allowed to retain it from the time of the death of
Tumfu Kwa right up to the date of the present proceedings. According to them,
the period is about 15 years.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>It was
pointed out by the West African Court of Appeal in the case of Adu v. Kuma (3
W.A.C.A. 240 at p.241) that:<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">“There
are a number of cases where the Courts have refused relief by way of decreeing
possession to a plaintiff who has slept on his rights, and others where in a
dispute as to ownership long undisturbed possession has been accepted as evidence
of title.”<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>And in
the subsequent case of Fiscian v. Nelson &amp; anor. (12 W.A.C.A.1) M’Carthy
Ag.C.J. was referring to the same legal situation when he said: -<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 view
was expressed by the Full Court in the Bokitsi Concession Enquiry (1902,
Renner, 239) that a former owner would not be allowed to claim land where he
had stood by for a long time while someone else occupied the land and incurred
pecuniary commitments under the impression that he was entitled to the land,
notwithstanding that prescription is unknown to native customary law and that
no statutory limitation applies to the case. This obiter dictum has been
followed in many decisions, and the rule it enunciated is well established. The
period of time which will justify the Court in acting upon it varies greatly
according to the circumstances.”<o:p></o:p>