SAMANPA vs. AMPOFO [1992]DLCA4287

Date	1992-10-29
Suit No.
Citation No.	[1992]DLCA4287

LAMPTEY JA

ESSIEM JA

OFORI-BOATENG JA

[1992]DLCA4287
																																						<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" >SAMANPA<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>AMPOFO<o:p></o:p>[COURT
OF APPEAL, KOFORIDUA]<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">

[1993 - 4] 1 GBR 211- 237&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;DATE: 29 OCTOBER 1992<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">

LAMPTEY
JA, ESSIEM JA, OFORI-BOATENG JA<o:p></o:p>

</div>ESSIEM
JA. This is an appeal from the decision of the High Court, Koforidua,
constituted by J S Williams J. The said court on 15th day of October 1987,
“struck off” the plaintiff-appellant’s action upon a preliminary objection
raised by the respondent before that court. Before I deal with the grounds of
appeal I propose to give the facts of the case and the circumstances leading to
the instant appeal.<o:p></o:p>This
dispute relates to the office of the Krontihene of Akim Kotoku. The action
herein was commenced by an originating summons by which the plaintiff-appellant
sought the following relief from the High Court:<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;“(1) declaration that the decision of the then
Akim Kotoku State Council between Obaapanin Afua Donkor as plaintiff and F B
Amoah alias Abrokwa Gyampim, as defendant, concerning the rival claims of the
Aduana and Asona clans to be eligible to the office of Krontihene of Akim
Kotoku, was a nullity as being contrary to the principles of natural justice.”<o:p></o:p>The
supporting affidavit of the plaintiff, Amma Samanpa, spells out the events
leading to the action in some detail and I reproduce the same hereunder:<o:p></o:p>“1.
That I am the plaintiff herein and institute this action as the head of and
representing the royal Aduana clan attached to the Kronti stool of Akim Kotoku.
The defendant who is the Abusuapanin of the Asona clan attached to the said
stool is sued as such.<o:p></o:p>2.
That from the beginning of the founding of the state of Akim Kotoku the office
of Krontihene of the state had belonged to and been occupied by a royal of the
Aduana clan of which I am the present head.<o:p></o:p>3.
That in or about 1943 Nana Darko Gyimah III, then holder of that office from
the Aduana clan, was deposed by the Omanhene thereby rendering the office
vacant; consequently in or about 1947 it became necessary to elect another
candidate to fill the vacancy.<o:p></o:p>4.
That the Aduana clan elected one of its members by name Kwame Hemeng to the
office but rather surprisingly one F B Amoah, alias Abrokwa Gyampim from the
Asona clan, was also elected to the office and both candidates were presented
to the then Omanhene, Nana Frempong Manso II.<o:p></o:p>5.
That the election of these two candidates resulted in a chieftaincy dispute
between the Aduana clan and the Asona clan with Aduana clan claiming to be
exclusively entitled to the office while the Asona clan claimed to be entitled
to share in it.<o:p></o:p>6.
That this dispute went for determination to the then State Council of Akim
Kotoku under the provisions of the Native Authority (Colony) Ordinance 1944,
with Obaapanin Afua Donkor, my immediate predecessor in office, as plaintiff
and the said F B Amoah alias Abrokwa Gyampim and others as defendants.<o:p></o:p>7.
That on 25th July 1947 the council gave judgment in favour of the defendants
and ordered as follows:<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;“That Amoah be recognised as the Krontihene.
That the two houses (Asona and Aduana) become eligible to the office of the
Krontihene from that date hereof but that for the time being the Aduana stool
be made subservient to the Asona stool which now holds the office.”<o:p></o:p>8.
That the said decision was very distasteful to the Aduana clan; whatever be the
case, I am advised by counsel and I verily believe the same to be true that
after delivering judgment as aforesaid the matter became closed before the
council which became functus officio.<o:p></o:p>9.
That rather surprisingly, the next day, that is 26 July 1947, the council
without hearing both sides afresh or, at any rate, without hearing or giving
the Aduana clan the opportunity to be heard, purported to vary or review the
decision of 25 July 1947 to the following:<o:p></o:p>“That the Asona family
only shall henceforth be eligible to the office of the Krontihene. That the
Aduana house formerly Krontihene now owes allegiance to the Omanhene as
Aduanahene under the present Krontihene’s house and further that copies of this
variation be served on all parties affected by this order.”<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>10.
That on the strength of the said judgment varied as aforesaid, the said F B
Amoah, alias Abrokwa Gyampim, became the Krontihene and was after his death
succeeded in that office by two other members of the Asona clan which does not
recognise the eligibility of members of the Aduana clan to the office of
Krontihene.<o:p></o:p>11.
That the office of Krontihene having become vacant since last year with the
abdication of Nana Amponsah Antwi of the Asona house as Krontihene. I am
reliably informed and I verily believe the same to be true that the Asona clan
is making preparations to install a candidate from its membership.<o:p></o:p>12.
That unless and until the so-called variation order of the state council given
on 26th day of July 1947 is declared or held to be a nullity the Aduana clan
will forever be held barred from holding the office of Krontihene which it had
held from time immemorial until it was interrupted in 1947 as hereinbefore
stated.”<o:p></o:p>The
respondent entered an unconditional appearance to the originating summons on
12/3/86. Then on 21 March 1986 the respondent filed a motion on notice “for an
order striking out the plaintiff’s action”. The grounds stated were:<o:p></o:p>