AWUME vs. DONYA [1962]DLHC1377

Date	1962-05-15
Suit No.
Citation No.	[1962]DLHC1377

PREMPEH J.

E.D. KOM FOR THE PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT.

G.S. LASSEY FOR THE DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT.

[1962]DLHC1377
																																						<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">AWUME<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">DONYA <o:p></o:p>[HIGH COURT, HO]<o:p></o:p>[1962] 1 GLR 357<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"> 15TH MAY, 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">

E.D.
KOM FOR THE PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT.<o:p></o:p>

G.S.
LASSEY FOR THE DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT.<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">

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

</div><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>JUDGMENT OF
PREMPEH J.<o:p></o:p>This is an appeal from the decision of the Kpandu Local Court
Division “1” given on the 9th June, 1961, in favour of the defendant-respondent
herein.<o:p></o:p>By his amended claim, the plaintiff-appellant claimed against the
respondent an order upon the respondent to show cause why he had refused to
allow the respondent to redeem his property commonly called Anokpete land,
which he pledged to the respondent for the sum of £G60, which sum he had
tendered for the redemption of the land and which the respondent had refused to
accept.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The short facts of the case are that by a document dated the 3rd
June, 1954, the appellant obtained a loan of £G60 from the respondent which he
promised to repay on the 31st December, 1954, and by way of security therefor,
the appellant pledged to the respondent a portion of land known as the Anokpete
land. It was a term of the said transaction that if the appellant failed to
repay the amount at the fixed date, the respondent was at liberty to take
possession of the said land without a court order, and to vest title thereof in
himself.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>No evidence was led by the parties in the trial court, but in an
affidavit sworn to by the appellant which is part of the proceedings herein, he
stated that he tendered some payment to the respondent for the redemption of
the land but he refused to accept it, and he consequently took possession of
the land.<o:p></o:p>Sometime during the year 1961, one Dorothea Yawa Awume brought an
action against both the appellant and the respondent herein in the Kpandu Local
Court Division “1” in which she claimed that the Anokpete land was family
property which the appellant herein had wrongfully pledged to the respondent
herein. The appellant who was the first defendant in the action pleaded liable,
but the respondent who was therein the second defendant contested the claim. After
hearing the parties in that action the local court magistrate made the
following finding of fact:<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">“From the evidence on record there is not the least doubt that
first defendant is the bona fide owner of the land in question and that first
defendant entered into agreement with second defendant for the loan by second
defendant with the full knowledge and consent of members of plaintiff’s and
first defendant’s family. I am satisfied that the first defendant was the bona
fide owner of the land in question and that by the agreement which was mutually
concluded between first defendant and second defendant ownership of the land
has been legally transferred to the second defendant who is now to be
recognised as the bona fide owner of the land in question.”<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>After making this finding, the trial court then dismissed the
claim of Dorothea Yawa Awume and entered judgment for the second defendant,
i.e. the respondent herein.<o:p></o:p>When the present case came up for hearing, the respondent moved
the trial court for an order to dismiss the appellant’s claim on the ground
that the matter was res judicata, and in support of this plea he relied solely
upon their judgment already referred to in the case Dorothea Yawa Awume versus
the appellant and himself, the respondent.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>