POKU vs. FRIMPONG [1972]DLCA2407

Date	1972-07-19
Suit No.
Citation No.	[1972]DLCA2407

AZU CRABBE J.S.C.

LASSEY JA

ARCHER J.A.

E. D. KOM (E. C. DJAMSON WITH HIM) FOR THE APPELLANT.

NO APPEARANCE BY OR FOR THE RESPONDENT.

[1972]DLCA2407
																																						<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" >POKU <o:p></o:p>vs. <o:p></o:p>FRIMPONG <o:p></o:p>[COURT OF APPEAL]<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[1972]
1 GLR 230<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in 0in 0in 0in">

DATE:
19 JULY 1971.<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">

E. D. KOM (E. C. DJAMSON WITH HIM) FOR THE
APPELLANT.<o:p></o:p>

NO APPEARANCE BY OR 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">

AZU CRABBE J.S.C., LASSEY AND ARCHER
JJ.A.<o:p></o:p>

</div><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>JUDGMENT OF AZU CRABBE J.S.C.<o:p></o:p>This is
an appeal from the decision of Sampson Baidoo J. who gave judgment for the
plaintiff in a case in which the claim against the defendant was 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">“(a) The
sum of £G40 10s. being the value of fifteen loads of cocoa which the defendant
has wrongfully and unlawfully plucked from cocoa trees on the plaintiff’s land
situate at Sankori at a place commonly called Abonyiredesu bounded by the
property of Kwabena Poku, and by forest reserve and by the properties of Kwasi
Addai, Kwame Nsiah, Haruna and Kwaku Buor. <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 of perpetual injunction restraining the defendant or his servants and
agents and licensees from entering or in any way dealing or interfering with
the plaintiff’s said land.”<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>In his
statement of claim the plaintiff alleged that on 3 August 1960 he brought an
action in the Brong-Ahafo South Local Court claiming against the present
defendant possession of a forest land situate at Sankori at a place commonly
called Abonyeredesu, the boundaries of which are described in the writ and
statement of claim. Judgment was given in favour of the plaintiff on 5
September 1960 and this was confirmed by a judgment of the former Supreme Court
dated 3 June 1963. In paragraphs (5) and (6) of the statement of claim the
plaintiff averred 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">“(5)
There are cocoa trees on this land in respect of which the plaintiff holds two
judgments entitling him to possession thereof. <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
defiance of these two judgments, the defendant has audaciously and wrongfully
entered the plaintiff’s said land again, and has by himself and his servants
and agents wrongfully plucked therefrom and made use for himself fifteen loads
of cocoa.”<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>In his
statement of defence the defendant admitted the existence of the two judgments
pleaded by the plaintiff, but he averred that: “the land, the subject-matter of
the present suit, is an entirely different piece of land, distinct from the
land described in paragraph (1) of the plaintiff ‘s statement of claim, which
the defendant admits has been adjudged to be the plaintiff’s property.” The
defendant denied that he had ever entered the land described in the plaintiff’s
statement of claim, and he made the following important averments in the
statement of defence:<o:p></o:p>“(4) The
land which the plaintiff now claims from the defendant herein is different from
the one he has described in his writ of summons and paragraph (1) of his
statement of claim; the plaintiff has done this with the sole purpose of
misleading this honourable court, so as to defeat the ends of justice. (5) The
defendant will therefore at the hearing of this suit put the plaintiff to
strict proof as to the identity of the subject-matter of this suit and that of
the earlier suit. (6) The defendant denies paragraphs (5) and (6) of the
plaintiff’s statement of claim, and states further that the boundaries of the
land now being claimed by the plaintiff in this suit are as follows: By the
properties of Kwaku Seidu, Kramo Badu, forest reserve, Kwame Frempong
(plaintiff) and Kwasi Addae, and not as wrongly described in paragraph (1) of
the plaintiff’s claim. (7) The defendant states further that he has never had
any dispute in respect of his said farm described in paragraph (6) supra, with
the plaintiff or anybody else, and he has been in possession of and enjoyed</main>