NANA AKOTO III v. NANA KWASI AGYIMAN I AND NANA KWAKU DUA III vs. NANA KWASI AGYIMAN I (CONSOLIDATED APPEALS) [1962]DLSC1601

NANA AKOTO III v. NANA KWASI AGYIMAN I AND NANA KWAKU DUA III vs. NANA KWASI A... [1962]DLSC1601

Date	1962-06-29
Suit No.
Citation No.	[1962]DLSC1601

KORSAH JSC

C.J. JSC

VAN LARE JSC

SARKODEE-ADOO J.S.C.

E. AKUFO-ADDO FOR THE DEFENDANT-APPELLANTS.

G. S. LASSEY FOR THE PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENTS.

[1962]DLSC1601
																																						<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:#548DD4">NANA AKOTO III v. NANA KWASI AGYIMAN I AND NANA KWAKU<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:#548DD4">DUA III <o:p></o:p><a name="_gjdgxs"></a><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:#548DD4">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:#548DD4">NANA KWASI AGYIMAN I (CONSOLIDATED APPEALS) <o:p></o:p>[SUPREME COURT]<o:p></o:p>[1962] 1 GLR 524<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"> 29TH JUNE, 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.
AKUFO-ADDO FOR THE DEFENDANT-APPELLANTS.<o:p></o:p>

G.
S. LASSEY FOR THE PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENTS.<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 6.0pt 0in">

KORSAH C.J., VAN LARE AND
SARKODEE-ADOO JJ.S.C.<o:p></o:p>

</div><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>JUDGMENT OF VAN
LARE, J.S.C.<o:p></o:p>This is an appeal in two consolidated actions by two different
plaintiffs against the same defendant tried before J. L. Minnow, Esq.,
Commissioner of Assize and Civil Pleas (as he then was), in the Land Division
of the High Court at Ho and Accra where he delivered judgment on the 13th
January, 1960, in favour of the plaintiff in each case. In one action Nana
Akoto III, representing the people and stool of New Ayoma claims against Nana
Kwasi Agyiman I, representing the people and stool of Likpe-Kukurantumi, (a)
declaration of title to a piece or parcel of land described roughly as being
and lying between the rivers Danyi and Owodin and contiguous to the defendant’s
stool land “with River Danyi as the common boundary” and which has been
delineated in pink on the plans exhibits A and B made in pursuance of an order
of court, (b) recovery of possession, (c) £G500 mense profits, and&nbsp; (d) perpetual injunction to restrain the
defendant and his subjects from further trespass; in the other action Nana
Kwaku Dua II, representing the people and stool of Old Baika, claims against
the same defendant, Nana Kwasi Agyiman I, representing the people and stool of
Likpe-Kukurantumi (a) declaration of title to a piece or parcel of land named
as “Ama Lekoko” land, the description of which as per the claim is rather
difficult to follow, but it is easily identified as particularly delineated in
pink on the plans exhibits A and C, also made in pursuance of an order of court
for the purpose of the trial, (b) recovery of possession, (c) £G500 damages for
trespass, and (d) perpetual injunction to restrain the defendant and his
subjects from further trespass.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The plans clearly show the area in dispute between the parties in
each case and it can be seen that the two pieces or parcels of land claimed by
the New Ayoma stool and the old Baika stool respectively against the
Likpe-Kukurantumi stool together form a continuous stretch of land with the
parties as adjoining land owners. In each action judgment was given for the
plaintiff, as already stated, granting him all the reliefs claimed with £G250
damages for trespass in each case.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The cases were considered separately and separate judgments given.
It is against these judgments this appeal is brought.<o:p></o:p>It is observed from the plans and disclosed in the pleadings that
the parties are adjoining land owners. The plaintiff’s land is situate
approximately north-west of the River Danyi running from a north-easterly to a
south-westerly direction while the defendant’s land is situate approximately
south-east of the said river. The issue raised for determination was whether
the River Danyi, as claimed by the plaintiff, is the correct or true boundary
between their adjoining stool lands, or rather, as claimed by the defendant, it
is the row of Ntome trees standing in a line from the bank of the River Danyi
on the east to the bank of the Owodin in the west. These trees are shown in
yellow on exhibit A along the north of the area in controversy.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The case for the plaintiff is that the people of New Ayoma were
earlier to arrive in the area and settled on land including that in dispute
situate along the western bank of the River Danyi and extending further west to
the Owodin stream; that it was twenty-nine years afterwards that the people of
Likpe-Kukurantumi arrived and settled on land on the eastern bank of the River
Danyi and were extending further eastwards of that river; that thereafter and
for a long number of years both sides have acknowledged the River Danyi as a
natural boundary between their respective lands and conf</main>