ANNAN vs. BUCKLE AND ANOTHER [1977]DLCA1235

Date	1977-05-19
Suit No.
Citation No.	[1977]DLCA1235

JIAGGE JA

SOWAH JA

FRANCOIS J.A.

WILLIAM AMARFIO FOR THE APPELLANT.

E. D. KOM FOR THE RESPONDENTS.

[1977]DLCA1235
																																						<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" >ANNAN <o:p></o:p>vs. <o:p></o:p>BUCKLE AND ANOTHER <o:p></o:p>[COURT OF APPEAL, ACCRA]<o:p></o:p>[1977] 2 GLR 329<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:
19 MAY 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">

WILLIAM AMARFIO FOR THE APPELLANT.<o:p></o:p>

E. D. KOM 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">

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

</div><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>JUDGMENT OF FRANCOIS J.A.<o:p></o:p>This is
an appeal from the decision of circuit judge Isaac Amuah, Esq., sustaining the
plaintiffs’ (hereafter called the respondents) claim for a declaration of title
and recovery of possession of a parcel of land at Abossey Okai, Accra. The
issue for determination was the simple but frequently recurring one of
competing titles.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The
respondents traced their title to the Akumajay Mantse, Nii Ayikai II whose
stool owned the area in Abossey Okai described as “Opete Kpakpo” where the land
in dispute was situated. This land had been adjudged to belong to the Akumajay
stool by a decision of the Privy Council in a suit entitled Nii Abossey Okai v.
Nii Ayikai II (1950) 12 W.A.C.A. 37. The respondents traced their root of title
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">(1) Sale in 1959 by Nii Ayikai II
to one Amua Sekyi (exhibit A);<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) Sale in 1960 by Amua Sekyi to
the respondents’ mother, Anyema Korle (exhibit B);<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) Separate gifts of the land by
Anyema Korle to her children, the respondents, in 1965 (exhibits C and D).<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>It was
the defendant’s (hereafter called the appellant) case that her title, whose
root was established in 1923 from Nii Abossey Okai, then acting Akumajay
Mantse, and registered in the Deeds Registry as No. 1812/1960 on 15 September
1960, gave her priority over the respondents whose document from Nii Ayikai II
was registered on 30 December 1960, some three months after. It was the
appellant’s further case that though the respondents derived title from the
substantive Akumajay Mantse, since her grantor was the accredited caretaker of
Akumajay stool lands with power of alienation over them and was the acting
Akumajay Mantse at the time of the grant, her title was not only competent but
superseded any others.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The
learned circuit judge was called upon to decide which of the rival stool
occupants could alienate the land subject-matter of dispute at the respective
dates they purported to do so. This entailed the consideration of any powers of
alienation the appellant’s grantor had over land in Abossey Okai in 1923. It
also involved scrutiny of Nii Abossey Okai’s credentials as acting Akumajay
Mantse in 1923 and his rights as a caretaker. The learned circuit judge had
also to consider Nii Ayikai II’s position in 1959 when he purported to sell to
Amua Sekyi. Founding himself on the authority of Nii Abossey Okai v. Nii Ayikai
II (supra), the circuit judge held that at the material date of the appellant’s
grant, that is, in 1923, Nii Abossey Okai had ceased to be acting Akumajay
Mantse. On the other hand Nii Ayikai II from whom the respondents derived title
had been firmly ensconced at that date as substantive Akumajay Mantse.
Furthermore, that case demonstrated that Nii Abossey Okai was fighting for the
lands for his own family, the Adawude family and not for the Akumajay stool.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>It was
obvious that if the facts were accurately stated and the Privy Council decision
correctly interpreted, no question of priority of title could arise as Nii
Abossey Okai had been divested of any powers of alienation in 1923.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>