NYAN vs. AMIHERE AND ANOTHER [1964]DLSC1933

Date	1964-02-29
Suit No.
Citation No.	[1964]DLSC1933

ADUMUA-BOSSMAN JSC

MILLS-ODOI JSC

OLLENNU J.S.C.

DR. J. B. DANQUAH FOR THE APPELLANT.

SAMPSON BAIDOO FOR THE RESPONDENTS.

[1964]DLSC1933
																																						<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" >NYAN <o:p></o:p>vs. <o:p></o:p>AMIHERE AND ANOTHER <o:p></o:p>[SUPREME COURT]<o:p></o:p>[1964] GLR 162<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:
29 FEBRAURY 1964.<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">

DR. J. B. DANQUAH FOR THE APPELLANT.<o:p></o:p>

SAMPSON BAIDOO FOR THE RESPONDENTS.<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, MILLS-ODOI AND OLLENNU JJ.S.C.<o:p></o:p>

</div><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>JUDGMENT OF ADUMUA-BOSSMAN J.S.C.<o:p></o:p>This
appeal is against a decision of Charles J. dated 5 June 1962 in the Sekondi
High Court whereby he gave judgment against the plaintiff-appellant
(hereinafter called shortly the appellant) dismissing his claim for <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">(1) a
declaration of title to the parcel of land described in the writ, <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">(2) £G500
damages for trespass and <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">(3) Perpetual
injunction to restrain the defendant-respondent (hereinafter called the
respondent), his agents and servants from further commission of trespass on the
said parcel of land.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>In the
statement of claim filed on behalf of the plaintiff the following material
averments were made:<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">“(3)
Plaintiff’s stool has attached to it a large tract of land including the land
described in the writ of summons herein, [the description of the land in the
writ was then repeated or reproduced in this paragraph of the statement of
claim]. <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">(4) In
the year 1943 plaintiff‘s stool brought an action against the stool of the
defendants in the native tribunal of the paramount chief of Benyin, Western
Nzima, claiming ownership of the land described above.<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">(5)
Judgment was given in favour of plaintiff‘s stool with £15 costs, against the
stool of the defendants on 14 September 1945. <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">(6) In a
later suit between the plaintiff ‘s stool and that of the defendants in the
Land Court, Sekondi, the court held that the judgment of the native tribunal of
1945 did not show the identity of the land in dispute with sufficient certainty
to create an estoppel. (7) On appeal to the Court of Appeal the latter court upheld
the judgment of the Land Court and ordered the plaintiff to bring a fresh
action in order that the real issue, namely, the title to the land, may be
decided. <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">(8)
Wherefore plaintiff claims against the defendants in terms of the writ of
summons.”<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>In the
statement of defence filed on behalf of the defendants, the material averments
were these:<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">“(3) The
defendants do not admit paragraph 3 of the statement of claim. The greater
portion of the land described in the writ and in paragraph 3 of the statement of
claim is the property of the stool of Awhaka. <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">(4) The
land attached to the defendant’s stool of Awhaka includes and is contiguous to
a piece or parcel of land . . . the boundaries whereof, de</main>