BADU AND OTHERS vs SAH AND ANOTHER [2000]DLCA113

Date	2000-06-29
Suit No.
Citation No.	[2000]DLCA113

ESSILFIE-BONDZIE JA

ANSAH JA

OWUSU-ANSAH JA

ADUMUA BOSSMAN (WITH HIM HEWARD MILLS) FOR THE RESPONDENT.

NO REPRESENTATION FOR THE APPELLANT.

[2000]DLCA113
																																						<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" ><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;
mso-fareast-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;
color:#00B0F0">BADU AND OTHERS<o:p></o:p><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;
mso-fareast-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;
color:#00B0F0">vs<o:p></o:p><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;
mso-fareast-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;
color:#00B0F0">SAH AND ANOTHER<o:p></o:p>[COURT OF APPEAL, ACCRA]<o:p></o:p>[1999-2000] 2 GLR 139<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid black 1.0pt;
mso-border-bottom-alt:solid black .5pt;padding:31.0pt 31.0pt 1.0pt 31.0pt;
mso-border-shadow:yes">

</div>COUNSEL:ADUMUA BOSSMAN
(WITH HIM HEWARD MILLS) FOR THE RESPONDENT.NO
REPRESENTATION FOR THE APPELLANT.___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________CORAM:ESSILFIE-BONDZIE,
ANSAH AND OWUSU-ANSAH JJA___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________JUDGEMENT<o:p></o:p>Owusu-Ansah JA. <o:p></o:p>Delivered the first judgment of the court at the invitation of
Essilfie-Bondzie JA. This is an appeal against the judgment of Her Lordship
Justice Sophia Adinyira sitting at the High Court, Koforidua on 25 April 1999.<o:p></o:p>In brief, the facts of the case are that the plaintiff-appellants
(hereinafter referred to as the plaintiffs) are the surviving spouse and sons
respectively of the late Nana Okru Barning, known in private life as Nana Kwame
Owusu-Ansah, chief of Old Tafo in Akim Abuakwa. He died intestate on 14 May
1984. The first defendant-respondent and the second defendant-respondent
(hereinafter referred to as the first and second defendants respectively) are
customary successor and head of family respectively of the deceased.<o:p></o:p>The plaintiffs’ writ stated 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">“The plaintiffs’ claim as the spouse and children of the late Nana
Okru Barning alias Kwesi Owusu-Ansah against the defendants as the customary
successor and head of family respectively, jointly and severally is for:<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">(1) A declaration that the plaintiffs are entitled to a portion of
the estate of the late Okru Barning alias Kwasi Ansah of Old Tafo. <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">(2) An order for the distribution of the estate of the deceased in
accordance with the provisions of the Intestate Succesion Law, 1985 (PNDCL
111). <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">(3) An order for accounts of all the cocoa and all other produce
on the deceased’s land situate at Odwaa near New Tafo.”<o:p></o:p>The plaintiffs based their claim on the assertion that the
deceased who died intestate on the 14 May 1984 left behind four houses at Old
Tafo and a large cocoa farm at Odwaa. They claimed the first defendant had
taken possession of these properties and distributed them among members of the
family excluding the plaintiffs. They claimed that as spouse and children of
the deceased they were entitled to a substantial portion of the estate which
they are demanding in accordance with the provisions of the Intestate
Succession Law, 1985 (PNDCL 111).<o:p></o:p>The defendants denied the plaintiffs’ claim on the basis that Nana
Okru Barning died on 14 May 1984, before PNDCL 111 came into force, and
therefore they, the family, have an interest in the estate; adding that the
wife and children have no statutory interest in the estate. At the summons for
directions a number of issues were set down for trial.<o:p></o:p>After the first defendant had been appointed customary successor
to the late Okru Barning, he applied to the High Court, Koforidua for letters
of administration. Three persons, namely Nana Yeboah Akosah, Opanin Kwadwo
Appiakorang and Kwame Boateng filed caveats against the application. The
dispute as to who was entitled to the grant of letters of administration could
not be resolved. The court ordered that a writ of summons should be issued for
the determination of that matter. The defendants filed a writ of summons on 1
February 1985. The case, suit No C 39/85, is still pending.<o:p></o:p>