TWIFO OIL PLANTATION PROJECT LIMITED vs. AYISI AND OTHERS [1983]DLCA2176

Date	1983-05-13
Suit No.
Citation No.	[1983]DLCA2176

FRANCOIS JA

MENSA BOISON JA

ABBAN J.A.

ATO DADZIE FOR THE DEFENDANT-APPELLANTS.

KWAKYE FOR THE PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENTS

[1983]DLCA2176
																																						<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" >TWIFO OIL PLANTATION PROJECT LIMITED <o:p></o:p>vs. <o:p></o:p>AYISI AND OTHERS <o:p></o:p>[COURT OF APPEAL, ACCRA]<o:p></o:p>[1982-83] GLR 881<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:
13 MAY 1983<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">

ATO DADZIE FOR THE DEFENDANT-APPELLANTS. <o:p></o:p>

KWAKYE FOR THE PLAINTIFF-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">

FRANCOIS, MENSA BOISON AND ABBAN JJ.A.<o:p></o:p>

</div><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>JUDGMENT OF MENSA BOISON J.A.<o:p></o:p>This is
an appeal from the judgment of Wuaku J. sitting at the High Court, Cape Coast,
dated 30 April 1982, by which he found that, as against the
defendant-appellants (hereinafter referred to as the defendants), the plaintiff-respondents
(hereinafter referred to as the plaintiffs) were entitled to a declaration of
possessory title, an order of quia timet and perpetual injunction.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The
plaintiffs sued for themselves and on behalf of two farmers’ syndicates, the
Angua Ansah and Thomas Asare Yeboah groups. In 1928, the plaintiffs purchased
from the Merkwa stool a large tract of land on which they have settled ever
since. The Merkwa stool land and what the plaintiffs purchased are parts of a
larger tract of land known as the Hemang lands, in the Central Region of Ghana.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>Although
by the Hemang Lands Acquisition Decree, 1975 (NRCD 332), the lands of the
plaintiffs, together with other lands were acquired by the Republic of Ghana in
1973, the plaintiffs appeared to have obliviously remained on their lands in
their farming pursuits, until the advent of the defendants.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>As their
name implies, the defendants are engaged in commercial oil palm plantation
projects and enjoy both national and international credentials. In their quest
for land, the defendants were sponsored by the Central Regional Development
Corporation (CERDEC), which as lessees of the Republic of a portion of the
Hemang lands, were, in turn, to grant the defendants a sub-lease of part of
their area. The plantation project envisaged was a vast area, and on commencing
work on lands they believed were part of their leasehold, the defendants came
into a clash with the plaintiffs at the Angua Ansah area.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The
plaintiffs were obdurate in their stand, and opposed the cutting of forest
tracks for the purpose of field demarcations by the defendants. They maintained
the obstinate but false view that their lands were still their own by purchase,
and were unaffected by any government acquisition, or leasehold grants to the
benefit of any quasi-government organisation or their nominees. The resulting
unrest and threatened public disorders in the area, not only necessitated the drafting
of a contingent of police to the area, but also led to a series of meetings by
the regional minister, or his agents, with the plaintiffs and the inhabitants
of the Hemang area generally, both at Cape Coast and in the field at Angua
Ansah and at Twifo-Praso. These were all attempts to promote understanding and
to enable the defendants to carry out their programme. These efforts must have
proved ineffectual and at last led to the plaintiffs instituting the present
action for the reliefs against which the defendants now appeal.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>It is
observed that a number of issues were agitated before the trial court; among
which were the constitutionality of NRCD 332 itself, the capacity of the
plaintiff’s and their title to the Angua Ansah lands. In a well-reasoned
judgment, if I may say so with respect, the learned judge in effect concluded
that the possessory title of the plaintiffs, vis-a-vis the defendants, had been
trespassed upon by the defendants, and called for the protection of the law, in
the form of a declaration for possessory title.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>Much of
the contentious issues before the court below appears to have been put at rest;
but th</main>