MANU AND ANOTHER vs. KONTRE [1965]DLSC1828

Date	1965-05-17
Suit No.
Citation No.	[1965]DLSC1828

MILLS-ODOI JSC

OLLENNU JSC

BRUCE-LYLE J.S.C.

B.J. DA ROCHA (WITH HIM W. ADUMUA-BOSSMAN) FOR THE APPELLANTS.

VICTOR OWUSU (WITH HIM PREMPEH) FOR THE RESPONDENT.

[1965]DLSC1828
																																						<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" >MANU AND ANOTHER <o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;KONTRE <o:p></o:p>[SUPREME COURT]<o:p></o:p>[1965] GLR 375<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:
17 MAY 1965.<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">

B.J. DA ROCHA (WITH HIM W. ADUMUA-BOSSMAN) FOR THE
APPELLANTS.<o:p></o:p>

VICTOR OWUSU (WITH HIM PREMPEH) FOR THE
RESPONDENT.<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">

MILLS-ODOI, OLLENNU AND BRUCE-LYLE JJ.S.C.<o:p></o:p>

</div><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>JUDGMENT OF MILLS-ODOI J.S.C.<o:p></o:p>This is
an appeal from a judgment of Djabanor J. dated 22 February 1962. It is
concerned with a dispute as to ownership of a parcel of land situate at a place
known as Saakrome, an area lying north of the Offin Shelter Belt Forest
Reserve. The action arose out of certain events which took place in 1956 when
the plaintiff ‘s son, Kwabena Kontre, the plaintiff’s first witness, saw some
workmen employed by the defendant-company felling trees on a portion of the
land in dispute. Inquiries revealed that the defendant-company was working on
the land pursuant to rights which it claimed were given to it under felling
agreements made by it with the third party. By those agreements, the
defendant-company was to be entitled upon stipulated terms to fell and carry
away timber and timber-like trees marked by it and shown to the third party or
his representative. The trees could be felled within the area of Dotiem, an
area which included the land known as Saakrome, the subject-matter in dispute.
As a result, the plaintiff brought an action to protect what she alleged was
her right, claiming against the defendant-company:<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">“(a)
£G300 damages for trespass by the defendants into the plaintiff’s land commonly
known as Saakrome land. <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">(b)
Specific delivery to the plaintiff by the defendants of 24 timber trees-six of
which had already been felled, and eighteen of which were felled by the
defendants-which trees have all been cut into logs by the defendants-or the
logs into which the said twenty-four timber trees have been cut. <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">(c) A
full account of the weights and measurements and values of the logs into which the
said twenty-four timber trees have been converted. (d) In the alternative to
(b) 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">(c) the
plaintiff claims £G1,152(one thousand one hundred and fifty-two pounds) being the
value of the said logs cut out of the twenty-four timber trees hereinbefore
described and disposed of by the defendants.”<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>As an
interim measure pending the determination of the case, the plaintiff sought for
and obtained an injunction to prevent the defendant-company from further
trespassing on the land.<o:p></o:p>The
defendant-company was not in a position either to admit or deny the plaintiff’s
title to the land she claimed, but put her to strict proof. It contended that
the land in dispute was owned by Chief Kwaku Manu, representing the stool of
Nerebehi. As the defendant- company could only rely upon the rights given to it
by the felling agreements, the reasonable course was followed of joining Chief
Kwaku Manu as co-defendant. However, for the purpose of this appeal Chief Kwaku
Manu will be referred to hereafter as the “third party.” In the result the main
contestants were the plaintiff and the third party.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>In due
course the third party filed a statement of defence in which he denied the
plaintiff’s title to the land in dispute. He, the third party, claimed title to
the said land for the Nerebehi stool, of which he was the odikro, alleging that
the defendant-company carried out the timber operations with the leave and
licence of the Nerebehi stool. He then raise a number of issues in his defence,
prominent among them are 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">“(3) The
third party says that the land in question was given to his ancestor by
Otumfuor, Nana Opoku Ware, of blessed memory, through the Bantamahene after the
Abrimoro War. <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">