NUNEKPEKU AND OTHERS vs. AMETEPE [1966]DLSC1721

Date	1966-03-21
Suit No.
Citation No.	[1966]DLSC1721

SARKODEE-ADOO C.J

MILLS-ODOI JSC

BRUCE-LYLE J.S.C.

OFORI-ATTA FOR THE APPELLANTS.

ARTHUR FOR THE RESPONDENT.

[1966]DLSC1721
																																						<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" >NUNEKPEKU AND OTHERS <o:p></o:p>vs. <o:p></o:p>AMETEPE <o:p></o:p>[SUPREME COURT]<o:p></o:p>[1966] GLR 249<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:
21 MARCH 1966.<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">

OFORI-ATTA 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 windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in 0in 0in 0in">

SARKODEE-ADOO C.J., MILLS-ODOI 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>Mills Odoi
J.S.C. delivered the judgment of the court. This is an appeal from the judgment
of the High Court, Ho, dated 6 June 1961 in exercise of its jurisdiction as an
appellate court from the judgment of the South Anlo Local Court A. The High
Court allowed the appeal, and set aside the judgment of the local court which
had given judgment for the plaintiffs who are now the appellants before this
court.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>It is the
case for the plaintiffs that by a judgment of the Anlo Native Court A delivered
on 24 August 1959, in an action brought by them against one Kwashie Bohlibo
Akpalu, the first plaintiff was declared head, and the second and third
plaintiffs were also declared principal members of the Agbeve family of Anloga
and Woe and that it was in pursuance of that judgment and in their respective
capacities that this action was brought against the defendant in the South Anlo
Local Court A claiming:<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)
recovery of possession of a portion of Bawe 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) an
order upon the defendant, his agents, servants and labourers to vacate any
other portion of Agbeve family land known and called Bawe land, Aborme land and
Aveglo land wrongfully and unlawfully occupied and/or cultivated by the
defendant; 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) one
hundred pounds (£G100) damages for wrongful occupation and possession of the
said Agbeve family land.”<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>They
contended that the defendant is not a member of the Agbeve family and therefore
he is not entitled to occupy any portion of Agbeve lands which comprise Bawe
land, Aborme land and Aveglo land.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The case
for the defendant on the other hand is that the land in dispute was cultivated
by his grandfather, Agbeliti, who occupied it for many years; that upon
Agbeliti’s death members of the deceased’s immediate family, namely, Kpoha and
Kofi Ahli Agbeliti, remained in possession of the land, and that he (the
defendant) is now in possession of the said land in his capacity as a member of
the immediate family of Agbeliti. The defendant further contended that he is
also a member of the Agbeve family and therefore entitled to occupy and
cultivate Agbeve family lands.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The local
court accepted the case of the plaintiffs and entered judgment for them in
terms of their claim and awarded them £G50 damages. The defendant appealed from
that judgment to the High Court at Ho. The High Court allowed the defendant’s
appeal on two main grounds: (1) that the plaintiffs were not competent to bring
this action against the defendant because they failed to discharge the onus
which lay upon them to prove that they were entitled to recovery of possession
of the land in dispute; and (2) that the plaintiffs’ action against the
defendant was not maintainable.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>