AMANING ALIAS ANGU vs. ANGU II [1986]DLCA832

Date	1986-03-13
Suit No.
Citation No.	[1986]DLCA832

ABBAN JA

OSEI-HWERE J.A.

AMPIAH J.

E. D. KOM FOR THE APPELLANT

AKAINYAH FOR THE RESPONDENT.

OCRAN FOR THE CO-RESPONDENT.

[1986]DLCA832
																																						<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" ><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">

AMANING ALIAS ANGU <o:p></o:p>

&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;vs. <o:p></o:p>

{COURT OF APPEAL, ACCRA} <o:p></o:p>

[1984-86] 1 GLR 309<o:p></o:p>

DATE:
13 MARCH 1986<o:p></o:p>

</div><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>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 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 1.0pt 0in">

ABBAN, OSEI-HWERE JJ.A. AND AMPIAH J.<o:p></o:p>

</div><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>JUDGMENT OF ABBAN J.A.<o:p></o:p>The
action was commenced in the High Court, Sekondi by one J. W. Essien alias Kwesi
Baidu. But before judgment was delivered on 15 December 1963, he had passed
away. One Opanyin Armoo joined the suit as a co-defendant. But alas, he
suffered the same fate as Essien. Opanyin Armoo, after he had given his
evidence, also died. Kojo Korantsin Amaning and Kwamena Benyah were substituted
for Essien and Opanyin Armoo, respectively. The nature of the case was such
that the trial High Court allowed the substitution of those two persons not
because they had the capacity in which they made their respective applications,
but they were allowed to come in as nominal parties, so to speak, in order that
the action would not become abated. Thus the judgment determined only the
rights of the original parties—J. W. Essien, Nana Kobina Angu II, and Opanyin
Armoo. In this appeal the expressions “plaintiff” and “co-defendant” have been
used in reference to J. W. Essien and Opanyin Armoo, both deceased.<o:p></o:p>The
Kokodo Ebiradzi stool family of Fijai is the family from which chiefs of Fijai
are elected. The plaintiff claiming to be the head of that stool family sued
the defendant asking for the following declarations:<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">(a) That the Kokodo Ebiradzi
stool family of Fijai possessed only one stool;<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">(b) That the said family had no
second or any other stool at a place called Ntangofu;<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">(c) That the only stool of the
family was the one being occupied by the defendant and that the defendant was
not occupying any other stool at Ntangofu; and lastly<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">(d) an order of perpetual
injunction restraining the defendant from holding himself out as odikro of
Fijai or performing any functions as such so long as the defendant claimed to
occupy a stool at Ntangofu.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The
defendant, Nana Kobina Angu II, as admitted by all the parties, was and still
is the occupant of the said family stool, and in the circumstances he has been
and still is the recognised chief of Fijai. The defendant was sued in his
capacity as the chief of Fijai and in a case like this, there is a customary
obligation that the chief must bring the court action to the attention or
notice of all the principal members or elders of the stool who, together with
the chief, would ultimately have to find money to defend the action. The
defendant did exactly this when he was served with the plaintiff’s writ of
summons.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The
Kokodo Ebiradzi stool family is made up of about nine branches, each branch
having its own sub-head and the plaintiff claimed to be the overall head of the
family. When the principal members and elders of the stool family became aware
of the nature of the plaintiff’s claim, they were greatly appalled by the
plain</main>