KUMA AND ANOTHER vs. KOI-LARBI [1990]DLSC2265

Date	1990-06-28
Suit No.
Citation No.	[1990]DLSC2265

ADADE JSC

FRANCOIS JSC

WUAKU JSC

OSEI-HWERE JSC

AIKINS JJ.S.C.

NARTER OLAGA FOR THE APPELLANT.

RESPONDENT IN PERSON.

[1990]DLSC2265
																																						<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" >KUMA
AND ANOTHER<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>KOI-LARBI<o:p></o:p>[SUPREME
COURT, ACCRA]<o:p></o:p>[1991] 1
GLR 537<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">

</div>COUNSEL:<o:p></o:p>NARTER
OLAGA FOR THE APPELLANT.<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">

RESPONDENT
IN PERSON. <o:p></o:p>

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

</div>JUDGMENT
OF AIKINS J.S.C.<o:p></o:p>Aikin
J.S.C. delivered the judgment of the court. In March 1980 the
plaintiff-respondent who in this case claims that he is a member of the Akwapim
Union (a friendly society) obtained two pieces of land by way of assignment,
the first from the Akwapim Union represented by its president, Mr Philip Kwabi
Arthur-Baidoo on 9 March 1980 and stamped as AC 321/80, and the second from Mr
Philip Kwabi Arthur-Baidoo on 27 March 1980 and stamped as AC 2336/80. Both
pieces of land, the subject matter of the plaintiffs claim against the
defendant, form part of a piece of land belonging to the Nii Odoi Quao family
of Christiansborg and Accra and which land the family leased to the Akwapim
Union for a period of 99 years for residential purposes. The deed of conveyance
was dated 9 May 1940 and among the signatories for the family was Edmund Laud
Nikoi O’Lai Kotey, described as a principal member of the family, and for the
union, Philip Kwabi Arthur-Baidoo described as president. It was agreed that
the land should be divided into 120 plots of 60 feet by 100 feet to provide
living accommodation for 120 members of the union. For the 120 plots the rent
was to be £36 (thirty-six pounds) or six shillings for each plot. This
agreement was registered in the Lands Registry as No. 515/1950.<o:p></o:p>About five
years later, to be precise on 20 December 1945, a supplementary agreement to
that of 1940 was entered into by the parties to replace a portion of the land
which had been taken over by the government for public purposes. This lease was
registered as No 1066/1945 at the Lands Registry. By a lease registered at the
Lands Registry as No 986/68, the Akwapim Union demised a portion of its land to
Philip Kwabi Arthur-Baidoo. It is this lease that the said Arthur-Baidoo
assigned to the plaintiff on 27 March 1980.<o:p></o:p>During
the early 1950s the family claimed that the land had become forfeited through
the failure of the members to obtain individual grants from them as stipulated
in clause 2(a) of the 1940 lease. That clause stipulates:<o:p></o:p><p class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-bottom:5.0pt;mso-add-space:auto;
text-align:justify;text-indent:-.25in;mso-pagination:none;mso-list:l4 level1 lfo1;
border:none;mso-padding-alt:31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt;mso-border-shadow:yes">(a).&nbsp; “That they the members of the Akwapim
Union (lessees) may during the continuance of the term hereby granted obtain
individually Indenture of lease from the superior Landlord (Nii Odoi Kwao
Family) within one year from the first day of January, 1940 and will also pay
to the Lessor the said yearly rent of six shillings herein before reserved on
the said first day of January, 1941 failing to obtain such lease within one
year the Lessor shall have, the right to re-enter upon the whole or portion
thereof”<o:p></o:p>On 29
December 1954 the family, represented by Nikoi O’Lai Kotey and others, executed
in favour of one Moses Emmanuel Kwaku Addo, a member of the union, an 85-year
lease of two plots within the area covered by the 1940 lease at an annual rent
of £90. The following year two other documents dated 26 November 1955 were
executed, one by Kwaku Addo assigning his interest under the lease to Nikoi
O’Lai Kotey and others, and the other by O’Lai Kotey and the others leasing the
land to a Lebanese, Rose Nasif Mallah, for the erection of a night club.<o:p></o:p>The
Akwapim Union became infuriated and led by their president, Mr. Arthur-Baidoo,
they issued a writ against Rose Mallah and Kwaku Addo. By order of the High
Court presided over by Ollennu J. (as he then was) the family was joined as a
co-defendant, and on the application of Rose Mallah and Addo, O’Lai Kotey and
the other assignees were also added as co-defendants. In 1957 Ollennu J. (as he
then was) in Baidoo v. Mallah, Land Court, 19 September 1957, unreported, gave
judgment in favour of the plaintiff for recovery of possession of the land and
commented on clause 2(a) of the 1940 lease 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">“Now in
addition to stating that members of the union may take individual leases from
the family, clause 2(a) goes on to say that, the right to grant was to be exercised
within one year, and stipulates the payment of rents, not whenever they become
due, but specifically the rents which fall due on 1 January 1941.<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">These
stipulations in my opinion put a limit upon the right conferred by that clause
as to the period within which it could be exercised, namely within a year of 1
January 1940.”<</main>