PAUL AND OTHERS vs. KOKOO [1962]DLSC1611

Date	1962-12-21
Suit No.
Citation No.	[1962]DLSC1611

VAN LARE JSC

ADUMUA-BOSSMAN JSC

BLAY J.S.C.

N.Y. B. ADADE FOR THE APPELLANTS.

V. OWUSU FOR THE RESPONDENT.

[1962]DLSC1611
																																						<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">PAUL AND OTHERS <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">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">KOKOO <o:p></o:p>[SUPREME COURT]<o:p></o:p><a name="_gjdgxs"></a>[1962] 2 GLR 213<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"> 21ST 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">

N.Y.
B. ADADE 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 black 1.5pt;
padding:0in 0in 0in 0in">

VAN LARE, ADUMUA-BOSSMAN AND
BLAY, JJ.S.C.<o:p></o:p>

</div><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>JUDGMENT OF
ADUMUA–BOSSMAN J.S.C.<o:p></o:p>The action resulting in this appeal was instituted by the
plaintiff-appellant-respondent (hereinafter shortly referred to as the
plaintiff) against the defendants-respondents-appellants (hereinafter referred
to as the defendants) in the Brong-Ahafo (South) Local Court at Goaso. The
plaintiff alleged that he was the owner of scrub and an adjacent forest situate
on land called Asuokokoo Agya on Mim stool land, with boundaries as set out in
the summons, but that without his consent, the first defendant sold the said
scrub and forest to the second and third defendants, wherefore he claimed
declaration of his ownership and an injunction to restrain the defendants from
having anything to do with the said land.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>Before the trial commenced the second defendant moved the court to
“strike out and non-suit the plaintiff on the legal ground of res judicata,”
alleging that the dispute had previously been decided in his favour by the
award of a customary arbitration made by the Akwaboahene. The plaintiff denied
this, and the court held an enquiry into this preliminary issue at which the
parties called witnesses; the second defendant called the Akwaboahene and the
plaintiff called one Abu. The Akwaboahene’s evidence as to what took place
before him which is now relied on as constituting a valid customary arbitration
is of such decisive importance, in my view, that I will set out the material
portion thereof. This came after the Akwaboahene had explained that about five
months before the action, after he had sent the first defendant to allot a
portion of forest land at Asuokokoo on Mim stool land under his control to the
second defendant, the plaintiff accompanied by a stool subject one Kwasi Ampofo
of Mim, complained to him that it was their lands which the first defendant
allotted to the second defendant, and he thereupon sent one Kwasi Wusu to go
with them to inspect in order to ascertain the position. Kwasi Wusu verified
that the allotment to the second defendant was not near Ampofo’s area;
nevertheless the plaintiff alone returned and insisted that it was land
allotted to him by Ampofo which was allotted to the second defendant,
whereupon, after he had ascertained that in any event the plaintiff had not
given any drink for the land, he ordered the plaintiff not to go on the land
for the time being until he had sent to re-inspect it and the plaintiff went
away. Shortly afterwards however the second defendant came and complained that
the plaintiff had felled trees on the land. Then came the evidence relevant to
the arbitration, 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">“I invited both plaintiff and second defendant to meet me in my
village. Both met me. When they met I put the second defendant’s complaint to
plaintiff. I asked him why I ordered him to depute people to go and view the
area which I had allocated to second defendant, as they both were contesting
its ownership, and he had gone contrary to my orders by going into it to fell
trees therein. I asked plaintiff whether he had cleared the forest, and he
replied that he had not but asked Ampofo to cut it for him; I asked him why he
had not cleared it but had the audacity of felling trees where someone had
cleared without paying for the cost of labour done by the person who weeded it,
even if the place was for him. He could not answer. I told him that I had allocated
first the area to second defendant and had obtained customary drink on it, and
why was he worrying me? He then told me that he had offended me. I gave
judgment against him for second defendant. He apologised to me. I accepted it.
After returning from consultation he pacified me with a bottle of rum. I
accepted it and after the acceptance I forgave him. I ordered that I had given
the area in dispute to second defendant for which I had obtained drink to pour
libation on my stool, so he should not trespass into it again . . . I told him
that it was because of the stool that he was going to take the forest, but I
was the occupant and I had given it to second defendant; because he found
himself faulty and pacified me on the same area, I vested possession of the
forest in second defendant.”<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>Examined by the court he added the following:<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">“How I made the arbitration award, then at present the second
defendant is the owner of the area in dispute because I have collected drink to
pour libation on the stool of Akwaboa which myself and plaintiff serve under.
If two people make a complaint and the first one is not heard and plaintiff
apologised, then I have right to order that the area was for defendant, becaus</main>