ASAMOAH vs. SERVORDZIE [1987]DLSC708

Date	1987-03-19
Suit No.
Citation No.	[1987]DLSC708

ADADE JSC

FRANCOIS J.S.C

ABBAN JA

OSEI-HWERE JA

WUAKU J.A.

JAMES AHENKORAH FOR THE PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT.

S. M. A. MAWUKO (FOR M. R. K. ATADIKA) FOR THE DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT.

[1987]DLSC708
																																						<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" >ASAMOAH <o:p></o:p>vs. <o:p></o:p>SERVORDZIE <o:p></o:p>[SUPREME COURT, ACCRA]<o:p></o:p>[1987-88] 1GLR 67<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 MARCH 1987<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">

JAMES AHENKORAH FOR THE PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT. <o:p></o:p>

S. M. A. MAWUKO (FOR M. R. K. ATADIKA) FOR THE
DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT.<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">

ADADE, FRANCOIS JJ.S.C, ABBAN, OSEI-HWERE
AND WUAKU JJ.A.<o:p></o:p>

</div><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>JUDGMENT OF ADADE J.S.C.<o:p></o:p>In
December 1964 the defendant-respondent (hereinafter referred to as the
respondent), a border guardsman then stationed at Dormaa-Ahenkro, acquired a
piece of forest land at Asikasu, Brong Ahafo, for farming. He paid; £44s — and
a bottle of schnapps. He failed to farm it. On this aspect, the observation of
the Court of Appeal in Asomah v. Servordzie [1981] G.L.R. 152 at 158-159, C.A.
is pertinent. It says:<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">“Cultivation
of a farm does not mean simply the clearing of land and planting of crops. It
involves also good husbandry and constant maintenance to enable the farm to
flourish and bloom. Mere token cultivation to assert one’s occupation is not
enough.”<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>Making
appropriate inferences from the evidence as a whole the Court of Appeal found
at 158 that:<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">“. . .
the respondent cleared only a portion of the area demarcated to him by Anin and
left a substantial area uncleared. After his transfer, the respondent did not
take adequate steps to maintain the farm and as such the whole area became
overgrown with the result that there was no difference between the cleared
portion and the uncleared forest. Therefore, when the [plaintiff-appellant] was
put into possession he had to clear an extensive area before planting his nine
seasonal farms.”<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>(The
emphasis is mine.)<o:p></o:p>The High
Court’s finding in this area is that: “the defendant’s farm fell into utter
neglect <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
finding which the High Court says is supported by the evidence of the third
defendant witness that when the plaintiff took possession of the land “the
plaintiff did plant new cocoa.”<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>To get a
better and perhaps fuller understanding of these findings, we must look at the
substance of the evidence which the defendant led as to his farming operations.
He says he got the land in late December 1964. The land measured 40 acres . He
put on 100 labourers for only one day and those labourers cleared the whole of
the 40 acres. Both the High Court and the Court of Appeal disbelieved this
story, but agreed that the labourers must have cleared a small portion. The
respondent said he planted, alone, from about the end of January and part of
February. He says: “I remember I started planting crops getting to the end of
January and February 1965 when the rains started.”<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>On 15
February 1965 he was transferred from Dormaa-Ahenkro to Half-Assini and, from
his evidence, nothing happened again until 1970 when his wife made a certain
report to him. Therefore the farming operations he speaks of covered only the
last week of January and the two weeks of February, a period of at best three
weeks, even so not continuously. The conclusion of the two courts below
therefore amounts to a firm finding that the respondent failed to farm the
land.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>