AKYEM v. ADU AND OTHERS; ADU AND OTHERS v. BRANTUO AND ANOTHER (CONSOLIDATED) [1976]DLCA346

Date	1976-02-24
Suit No.
Citation No.	[1976]DLCA346

APALOO J.A

ANIN J.A

FRANCOIS J.A.

NANA AKUFO ADDO FOR THE APPELLANTS.

R. S. BLAY (WITH HIM J. K. POLLEY) FOR THE RESPONDENTS

[1976]DLCA346
																																						<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" >AKYEM v. ADU AND OTHERS; ADU <o:p></o:p>AND <o:p></o:p>OTHERS v. BRANTUO AND ANOTHER (CONSOLIDATED)<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;[COURT
OF APPEAL, ACCRA]<o:p></o:p>[1976] 2 GLR 63<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:
24 FEBRUARY 1976.<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">

NANA AKUFO ADDO FOR THE APPELLANTS.<o:p></o:p>

R. S. BLAY (WITH HIM J. K. POLLEY) 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">

APALOO, ANIN AND FRANCOIS JJ.A.<o:p></o:p>

</div><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>JUDGMENT OF ANIN J. A.<o:p></o:p>This is
an appeal in a consolidated land suit by the Buabin stool and its tenant, S. K.
Adu (hereinafter referred to collectively as the appellants) from a judgment of
the Cape Coast High Court dated 19 December 1972 dismissing their claim for
title to a parcel of land, and finding in favour of the Denkyira Fosu stool and
its tenant, Kwame Brantuo (hereinafter referred to simply as the respondents)
in respect of their rival claim of title to the same land and other ancillary
reliefs.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>From the
copious pleadings and interlocutory proceedings running to some 150 pages of
the printed record, the principal issue which emerges is the simple question,
which of the opposing stools, Buabin or Denkyira Fosu, owns the disputed area
edged red in exhibit HC2 (the plan of the area ordered by the court). A
secondary issue of immediate concern to the two tenants of the rival stools is
the question of title to a smaller area of farm land also edged red in exhibit
HC1, another plan ordered by the court showing the respective farms of the
tenants and the area in dispute between them and their stool grantors. It was
rightly conceded by learned counsel for both parties that the resolution of
this secondary issue depended on the outcome of the principal contest between
the two rival stools. Reliance was also placed on the Farm Lands (Protection)
Act, 1962 (Act 107); and each tenant also pleaded his willingness to attorn
tenant to whichever stool emerged victorious in the litigation.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The first
suit No. 35/64 was instituted by Nana Kodie Akyem representing the stool of
Denkyira Fosu against S. K. Adu. The latter’s three grantors were joined as
co-defendants on their own application to enable them to protect, not only
their allodial title to the disputed area, but also the joint grant made by
them.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>In its
statement of claim in suit No. 35/64, the respondent stool claimed the disputed
area as forming part of its stool lands. It then recited the grant in 1950 of a
timber concession over a substantial portion of these lands to Messrs. Abdo
Bros. of Dankwa per C.V. No. 753 of Cape Coast. The acts of trespass alleged
were that the appellant Adu had entered upon the concession area without the
respondent stool’s consent; cultivated large farms; and established a village
thereon.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>In his
statement of defence, S. K. Adu pleaded that he made his cocoa farms and built
his cottage on land customarily granted to him in January 1960 by the appellant
Buabin stool, the reputed owner; and that this grant was later confirmed by the
overlord paramount stool represented by the second appellant. In July 1962,
when he had made two seasonal cocoa farms and had started a third, he was
challenged by the respondent who came on the land and demarcated a portion of
the appellant’s reserve forest land for his tenant Kwame Brantuo to farm
thereon. In April 1963, Adu received a letter from the respondent stool’s
solicitors warning him that the land granted to him by the Buabin stool
belonged to their clients, to whom he must attorn tenant. As a stranger to the
area, he could not verify for himself the rival claims of the two stools; but
he was prepared to atton tenant to the respondent stool in the event of its
being adjudged owner by a court of competent jurisdiction.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>In its
defence, the Buabin stool claimed the boundaries named by the respondent stool
as constituting its own boundaries with other neighbouring stools. It claimed
the common boundary line between their two stools to be the “Yaayaa stream up
to Bensuabepo” (i.e. Bensua Hill). With respect to the res</main>