AKAKYIE II vs. EDIYIE [1977]DLCA1223

Date	1977-03-16
Suit No.
Citation No.	[1977]DLCA1223

ARCHER JA

ANIN JA

HAYFRON-BENJAMIN J.A.

E. D. KOM (DWIRA POODO WITH HIM) FOR THE APPLICANTS.

K. ADU-SAKYI (KODUA WITH HIM) FOR THE RESPONDENTS.

[1977]DLCA1223
																																						<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" >AKAKYIE II <o:p></o:p>vs. <o:p></o:p>EDIYIE <o:p></o:p>[COURT OF APPEAL, ACCRA]<o:p></o:p>[1977] 2 GLR 70<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:
16 MARCH 1977<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 (DWIRA POODO WITH HIM) FOR THE
APPLICANTS.<o:p></o:p>

K. ADU-SAKYI (KODUA WITH HIM) 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">

ARCHER, ANIN AND HAYFRON-BENJAMIN JJ.A.<o:p></o:p>

</div><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>JUDGMENT OF ANIN J.A.<o:p></o:p>This
appeal from the judgment of the Sekondi High Court dated 5 July 1974 raises the
fundamental question, what was the true nature of the plaintiff’s action - was
it an action for trespass simpliciter or was the plaintiff’s title put into
issue as a result of the pleadings, evidence and the nature of the defence? The
trial magistrate held the view that the plaintiff’s title was put into issue
even though the amended statement of claim contained only a claim for trespass.
The learned High Court judge sitting on first appeal thought differently and
ruled that it was trespass simpliciter. In this second appeal, the appellant
argues that the magistrate was right and the learned judge was wrong in his
categorisation of the suit while the respondent naturally disagrees. The main
ground of appeal argued by learned counsel for the defendant was that “the
learned judge was wrong in law in holding that title was not the real issue
between the parties.” Before considering this ground, it is first necessary to
turn to the pleadings and evidence.<o:p></o:p>By his
amended statement of claim, the plaintiff pleaded 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">“AMENDED
STATEMENT OF CLAIM <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">(1) that
the forest of Akaagyina-Krom belongs to the plaintiff, and that it has come to
the notice of the plaintiff that the above defendant is ploughing the said
forest for farming, and that the plaintiff warned the defendant not to plough
the said forest, but the defendant failed to pay any heed to the plaintiff. <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">(2) The
plaintiff and the defendant submitted the dispute to the divisional chief of
Agona-Ahanta on whose stool land the forest is. The chief of Agona-Ahanta and
eleven of his elders went into the dispute at an arbitration held at the
ahenfie. The plaintiff and the defendant each paid an arbitration fee of
N¢2.00. <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">(3) After
going into the dispute the arbitrators gave a decision in favour of the
plaintiff and adjudged him to be the person entitled to farm the virgin forest
at Akaagyina village. <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">(4) That
the divisional chief of Agona-Ahanta warned the defendant not to plough the
forest of Akaagyina, and yet still the defendant failed to pay any heed to the
divisional chief of Agona-Ahanta. <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) That
when the police of Agona-Junction heard of rumours of a riot that was coming to
the area of Agona-Ahanta because of the defendant ploughing the Akaagyina
forest, this honourable court made both the plaintiff and the defendant to
enter into bond for one year and to keep peace so that riot might not flare out
in the area. <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) That
the defendant is still ploughing the forest of Akaagyina in spite of all what
had happened above. <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">(7) That
the plaintiff wherefore claims from the defendant the sum of two hundred new
cedis (N¢200.00) as damages for unlawful trespass by ploughing the forest of
Akaagyina at Akaagyina-Krom or village. Dated at Takoradi the 16th day of July,
1970. R (Sgd.) Safohene Kofi Ediyie, Plaintiff.” T P<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The
plaintiff testified that his ancestors founded the village of Akaagyina-Krom
after clearing the virgin forest they encountered there. Since then the land
had been in the continuous possession of his deceased ancestors who had made
farms. Recently, the </main>