ACHIASE STOOL vs. APPIAH AND OTHERS [1962]DLHC1308

Date	1962-12-10
Suit No.
Citation No.	[1962]DLHC1308

APALOO J..

D. S. EFFAH FOR THE PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT.

S. WIREDU FOR GYIMAH FOR THE DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

[1962]DLHC1308
																																						<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:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;
color:#00B0F0">ACHIASE STOOL<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:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;
color:#00B0F0">&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:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;
color:#00B0F0">APPIAH AND OTHERS<o:p></o:p><span style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;
mso-fareast-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;
color:#548DD4">&nbsp;[HIGH COURT, KUMASI]<o:p></o:p>[1962] 2 GLR 159<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid black 1.5pt;
padding:31.0pt 31.0pt 1.0pt 31.0pt;mso-border-shadow:yes">

DATE:<span style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;
mso-fareast-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;
color:#00B0F0"> 10TH DECEMBER, 1962.<o:p></o:p>

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

D.
S. EFFAH FOR THE PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT.<o:p></o:p>

S.
WIREDU FOR GYIMAH FOR THE DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.<o:p></o:p>

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

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

</div><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>JUDGMENT OF
APALOO J.<o:p></o:p>The plaintiff is the present occupant of the Achiase stool. That
stool owns land at a place described as Nunya. It seems to be farm land and is
normally farmed upon by subjects of the stool. The defendants are some of such
subjects of the stool who farm on the land. The plaintiff testified that about
two years ago, it came to his knowledge that while his subjects were farming on
this land, they were driven away by the Ofoasehene. He said his subjects
therefore authorised him to go to law with the Ofoase stool. The plaintiff said
he did so and re-established the rights of his subjects to farm on that land
unmolested. The plaintiff said he incurred in that action a debt in the
aggregate sum of £G7,000 and after the successful conclusion of the litigation,
he held a meeting with such of his subjects as were farming on this land and
requested them to contribute towards the payment of the debt. The subjects,
however, declined to shoulder unaided the whole debt and refused to make
payment unless and until the chief and his elders paid a portion of the debt.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The plaintiff said he took the position that as he fell upon his
elders and got them to pledge their farms in order to raise moneys for the
litigation, neither he nor his elders were liable to pay anything towards the
debt. The subjects maintained their ground with the result that he instituted
proceedings against four of them. After unsuccessful references to the Regional
Commissioner and the District Commissioner for Juaso, a settlement was effected
between the plaintiff on one part and the subjects on the other by Nana
Juabenhene. This was at the behest of the Town Development Committee. The
result of the settlement was that the chief and his elders agreed to pay
£G2,500 out of the debt and the stool subjects farming on the land were to pay
the balance. It was said this settlement met with the unanimous approval of all
the parties. Accordingly, on the faith of it, some of the subjects who had
hitherto refused to make payment, paid their allotted portions. The first defendant,
who represents all the defendants in this action, admitted that he was present
at the settlement.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The first defendant and his ilk contend that they were not liable
to pay their allotted shares because they had no knowledge of the debt and that
even if such a debt was in fact incurred, they were not liable to pay without
prior approval by the Minister of the Interior. The trial magistrate held that
there was a valid customary arbitration at which the liability of the
defendants was established. He rejected the contention that the shares were not
payable without the approval of the Minister of the Interior.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>Against that judgment, the defendants appeal to this court and the
sole ground argued on their behalf was that the judgment of the trial court was
bad in law. The law against which the judgment sinned, was, according to
counsel, the law relating to customary arbitration. Basing himself on the
well-known case of Ankrah v. Dabra and Olaga1(1) counsel submitted that there
was no voluntary submission to an arbitration by the persons who farmed on the
land and there could, therefore, not be a binding award. It was also submitted
that there was no prior agreement to be bound by the award. I accept the
argument that what happened on the facts of this case was not an arbitration
stricto sensu. It seems that the Town Development Committee in order to avoid
what may well be a prolonged and expensive litigation sought the aid of Nana
Juabenhene to mediate between the Achiasehene on one hand and the subject-farmers
on the other. The evidence establishes clearly that the Juabenhene arrived at a
compromise which was mutually accepted by both sides. On the faith of that
settlement, some of the subject-farmers who had hitherto expressed opposition
to the payment, gave in and paid their shares. I hold, therefore, that there
was a negotiated settlement accepted by the parties. It is no less binding than
a formal arbitration award.<o:p></o:p>