AMPONSAH vs. KWATIA [1976]DLCA353

Date	1976-03-29
Suit No.
Citation No.	[1976]DLCA353

SOWAH J.A

ARCHER J.A

FRANCOIS J.A.

ASANTE TANNOR FOR THE APPELLANT.

ASARE FOR THE RESPONDENT.

[1976]DLCA353
																																						<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" >AMPONSAH <o:p></o:p>vs. <o:p></o:p>KWATIA<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;[COURT
OF APPEAL, ACCRA]<o:p></o:p>[1976] 2 GLR 189<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:
29 MARCH 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">

ASANTE TANNOR FOR THE APPELLANT.<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">

SOWAH, ARCHER AND FRANCOIS JJ.A.<o:p></o:p>

</div><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>JUDGMENT OF SOWAH J.A.<o:p></o:p>Sowah
J.A. delivered the judgment of the court. On 16 December 1974, we dismissed
this appeal but reserved our reasons as we were unable to support the reasoning
of the learned judge having regard to the evidence.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The
plaintiff was the acknowledged successor to a parcel of land with a house
thereon, which had been acquired by his great granduncle by name Odame. The
evidence shows that other persons, namely, the late Benin and the late Asa Kofi
had succeeded to this estate before him.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The
defendant, the son of one of the male children of Odame, his sisters and
brothers occupied the greater portion of the house in dispute. They are not
members of the Odame family, they being the progeny of a male child. Thus in
strict Akan custom they were living in the house at the pleasure of the successor
and of the plaintiff’s family. The house in dispute was not the self-acquired
property of their father; if it were, they would be entitled to reside therein
subject to good behaviour.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The
evidence shows that the plaintiff laid a complaint to the Krontihene, Nana
Baffour Ansah II, that members of his family had not adequate and sufficient
accommodation in the house and therefore the defendant should remove the
kitchens they had in the house to enable him put up more rooms to accommodate
other members of the family. Both parties appeared before the Krontihene and
his elders and a decision was arrived at that the defendant should remove the
kitchens. The Krontihene’s evidence was that the parties were satisfied or
appeared to be so. However, the defendant and the immediate members of his own
family left the house and went to live in their own family house. Thereupon the
plaintiff began a renovation of the rooms vacated by them. The action was
instituted because the defendant was interfering with and obstructing the
renovation.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>We are of
the view that the defendant not being a member of the plaintiff’s family had
only a licence to live in the house and at the pleasure of the family and that
when he vacated those rooms the successor was entitled as of right to re-enter
and to re-take possession thereof. Title to the property is in him.<o:p></o:p>We
neither share the learned judge’s views that the arbitration was not binding on
the plaintiff nor in the context of this case that “except with the consent and
approval of the successor and principal members of the plaintiff’s family, no
arbitration can be validly entered upon and no disposition of the family
property can be valid.”<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The
evidence shows that the plaintiff laid the complaint before the Krontihene and
the defendant submitted to it. The plaintiff cannot therefore resile from it;
and so long as he remained a successor the award would be binding on him and
his family. The successor is often the head of his family and can sue or be
sued on behalf of the family. When he takes action for the family there is a
presumption that he has the consent of the principal members of the family. The
evidence shows that the present plaintiff is also the head of the family.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>