TOMFO vs. AWONA AND ANOTHER [1973]DLHC2210

Date	1973-06-08
Suit No.
Citation No.	[1973]DLHC2210

CHARLES CRABBE J.

JAMES MERCER (WITH HIM E. BENTSI-ENCHILL) FOR THE APPELLANTS.

S. K. ESSIEM FOR THE RESPONDENT.

[1973]DLHC2210
																																						<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" >TOMFO <o:p></o:p>vs. <o:p></o:p>AWONA AND ANOTHER <o:p></o:p>[HIGH COURT,
SEKONDI]<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;[1973]
2 GLR 437<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:
8 JUNE 1973.<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">

JAMES MERCER (WITH HIM E. BENTSI-ENCHILL) FOR THE
APPELLANTS.<o:p></o:p>

S. K. ESSIEM 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">

CHARLES CRABBE J.<o:p></o:p>

</div><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>JUDGMENT OF CHARLES CRABBE J.<o:p></o:p>The
plaintiff-respondent (hereinafter called the plaintiff), claimed from the
defendants-appellants (hereinafter called the first and second defendants),
jointly and severally the sum of twenty cedis being the value of 50 oil palm
trees at 40 pesewas a tree. The first defendant was alleged to have felled
those trees on the plaintiff’s land at Ankyiren. The second defendant was
alleged to have authorised the first defendant to fell the same without the
plaintiff’s knowledge and consent.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>By his
statement of claim the plaintiff claimed that the land in dispute was the
self-acquired property of one Papa Ohia, an ancestor of his. Various members of
his family had succeeded to this land, the plaintiff being now the one in
possession. When the land became vested in the plaintiff by his family he was
in the Ankyiren area and he gave a portion of the land to his brother Nyame
Aboa who farmed the land.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>When he,
the plaintiff, returned to Ankyiren from Nzima he started farming on the land
in dispute. The second defendant disputed his right to the land, he resisted
and drove away the second defendant from the land. The second defendant
instituted an action against him but that was discontinued. About two months
after the discontinuance, the plaintiff discovered that the first defendant had
felled 50 oil palm trees on the land without his knowledge, his consent, or
permission. Inquiries revealed that the first defendant had stated that the
trees were given to him by the second defendant. This statement was confirmed
by the second defendant to the plaintiff.<o:p></o:p>To this
statement of claim the defendants averred that the second defendant is a
descendant of one Samuah Kojo and Ebokure Tia who first cultivated the virgin
forest concerned. They were succeeded by Esuwa Kofi and now the second
defendant and his brother Kweku Tom were in possession of the disputed land
having succeeded Esuwa Kofi. When the plaintiff returned to Ankyiren he found
the defendants on the land and thus it was the plaintiff who committed an act
of trespass by entering on the land and felling some trees.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The
second defendant and his brother Kweku Tom then lodged a complaint against the
plaintiff before the chief of Ankyiren, Nana Blay, who together with some
elders held an arbitration at which the matter was gone into. The disputed land
was inspected. The arbitrators found in favour of the second defendant and his
brother, costs being awarded against the plaintiff.<o:p></o:p>As a
result of further acts of trespass by the plaintiff, a second complaint was
lodged with Nana Blay but the plaintiff refused to appear. The plaintiff was
taken to court but the case was struck out.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>At the
hearing counsel for the plaintiff raised the issue that the area in dispute
being 28.5 acres and its value more than ¢3,000, the magistrate’s court had no
jurisdiction to deal with the matter. This was after the surveyor, who was
asked to prepare a plan of the area in dispute, had given evidence. The
original action was in respect of 1.4 acres. Counsel for the defendants
associated himself, and was in complete agreement, with the statement made by
counsel for the plaintiff, that the matter should be referred to the High Court
for directions.<o:p></o:p>