APPIAH vs. NKRUMAH AND OTHERS [1986]DLHC839

Date	1986-06-17
Suit No.
Citation No.	[1986]DLHC839

ASARE-KWAPONG J.

OPPONG ADJEI FOR THE PLAINTIFF.

ASANTE TANOR (LED BY OFOSU ASANTE) FOR THE DEFENDANTS AND CO-DEFENDANT.

[1986]DLHC839
																																						<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">

APPIAH <o:p></o:p>

{HIGH COURT, KOFORIDUA} <o:p></o:p>

[1984-86] 2 GLR 716<o:p></o:p>

DATE:
17 JUNE 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">

OPPONG ADJEI FOR THE PLAINTIFF. <o:p></o:p>

ASANTE TANOR (LED BY OFOSU ASANTE) FOR THE
DEFENDANTS AND CO-DEFENDANT.<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">

ASARE-KWAPONG J.<o:p></o:p>

</div><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>JUDGMENT OF ASARE-KWAPONG J.<o:p></o:p>The
plaintiff instituted this action in a representative capacity as the leader of
a group of Akwapim farmers who joined together to form a company or syndicate
with the purpose of purchasing farmland. Apart from a Togolese member of the syndicate,
it appears that all the original members of the syndicate were dead at the time
of the action; the plaintiff was the successor of his late uncle and elder
brother Ahyiah and Yaw Gyebi respectively, the latter was the leader of the
syndicate. It is the usual practice of such groups on the death of a member,
for his successor at law to be substituted as a member; it is in accordance
with this practice that the plaintiff became the leader of the group following
the death of his uncle and elder brother respectively.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The case
of the plaintiff was that in or about 1932 the original group left their native
Akwapim and were prospecting for good farming land, and bought the land in
dispute from Barima Nketia, the Chief of Pinaman, and his elders in or about
1932. He worked on the land with his uncle called Ahyiah who is now deceased
and whom he inherited; documents were prepared on the sale which he tendered as
exhibits A and A1.; he stated the value of the land and tendered a plan
prepared on the land and marked exhibit B. The syndicate went into cultivation
of the land and made cocoa farms thereon and built cottages on it and after
their death their lawful representatives succeeded them.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The cause
of action arose when some years after, that is in 1964, some subjects of the
stool, the defendants, started allocating portions of the syndicate’s land to
themselves and to tenants. The evidence reveals that during the lifetime of
Barima Boasiako II, the Chief of Pinaman (on whose stool land the land in dispute
is) a dispute arose between the syndicate and Barima Boaslako II, the latter
having been dissatisfied that the syndicate brought a surveyor unto the land
without his consent and knowledge. The syndicate and Nana Boasiako II appeared
before the Okyenhene the overlord of the land. According to the plaintiff the
syndicate was found liable for having brought the surveyor unto the land
without the knowledge of the chief and his elders of the stool despite the fact
that the land was bought legally. Consequent upon this arbitration, it was
decided that another document be prepared to cover the land in dispute. As a
result of this decision an indenture exhibit D was prepared indicating that the
land in dispute had been sold to the plaintiff syndicate for an agreed sum of
£336 in 1932 by the predecessor of Nana Boaslako II, a certified true copy of
the plan made in 1932, at the purchase of the land at the initial stage, was
attached to it. He said the Okyenhene ordered all the trespassers to leave the
land and that even though some had left, the present defendants continued their
acts of trespass on the land; further even though he shares boundary with the
stool of the co-defendant, he had never trespassed unto his land. In conclusion
he said in his evidence that when they appeared before the Okyenhene, the
defendants were also invited and during the inspection of the land, it was
discovered that the defendants’ land was within the land sold to them.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The
evidence of the first plaintiff witness was that she bought the land of one
Donkor, who was a member of the syndicate by auction sale in respect of which
he tendered exhibits E and F covering the purchase.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The
linguist of the Okyenhene for 37 years, Kwasi Obugyei, in his evidence
confirmed the evidence of the plaintiff as follows: He said in 1964 Nana
Boasiako II complained to the Okyenhene that the membe</main>