DOREEN AHUN vs GEORGE OPOKU APPIAH [2013]DLCA16155

Date	2013-03-21
Suit No.	SUIT NO: H1/9/2012
Citation No.	[2013]DLCA16155

MARFUL-SAU J.A. (PRESIDING)

ADJEI J.A

ACKAH-YENSU J.A

D.K. SOKPOI ESQ

EMMANUEL ARTHUR ESQ

[2013]DLCA16155
																																						<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" >&nbsp;DOREEN
AHUN<o:p></o:p>(PETITIONER/RESPONDENT)<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>GEORGE
OPOKU APPIAH<o:p></o:p>(RESPONDENT/APPELLANT)<o:p></o:p>[COURT OF APPEAL, CAPE COAST]<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;<div style="border-top: none; border-right: none; border-left: none; border-image: initial; border-bottom-width: 1.5pt; border-bottom-color: windowtext; padding: 0cm 0cm 1pt; margin-left: 0cm; margin-right: 9pt;">

<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:
justify;text-justify:inter-ideograph;border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0cm;mso-padding-alt:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">SUIT NO: H1/9/2012&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: 21ST
MARCH, 2013<o:p></o:p>

</div>CORAM<o:p></o:p>MARFUL-SAU J.A. (PRESIDING), ADJEI J.A, ACKAH-YENSU
J.A.<o:p></o:p><div style="border-top-width: 1.5pt; border-top-color: windowtext; border-left: none; border-bottom-width: 1.5pt; border-bottom-color: windowtext; border-right: none; padding: 1pt 0cm; margin-left: 0cm; margin-right: 9pt;">

<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;tab-stops:
center 242.9pt left 303.0pt;border:none;mso-border-top-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;padding:0cm;mso-padding-alt:1.0pt 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">&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; JUDGMENT&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <o:p></o:p>

</div>DENNIS
ADJEI, J.A<o:p></o:p>The Respondent/Appellant hereafter
called the respondent filed an appeal against the judgment of the High Court
Sekondi. The judgment was delivered on 17th December, 2010. The
brief facts of the case which culminated in this appeal were that, the parties
herein got married under Akan customary law. At the time of the marriage, the
plaintiff had put up an uncompleted house at Anaji, Takoradi. The petitioner
was tasked by the respondent to see to the completion of the house. The house
was later on converted to a guest house. According to the petitioner, she
jointly acquired other properties with the respondent. The respondent however
disputed&nbsp;&nbsp; the petitioner’s claim and
said that all the properties which were acquired during the subsistence of
their marriage were acquired by him.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;Some few years after the marriage, the
parties saw that they were incompatible.&nbsp;
The petitioner applied to the court for leave to file divorce
proceedings which was granted by the court. Pursuant to the leave granted by
the court, the petitioner filed her petition seeking from the court, inter alia,
the dissolution of their customary marriage, a declaration that she was a joint
owner of all the three properties in Takoradi, recovery of possession for her
half share of the properties, compensatory damages and an order for perpetual
injunction.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;On 17th December, 2010, the
High Court, Sekondi dissolved the marriage and further decreed that the petitioner
was a joint owner of all the three properties. The respondent aggrieved by the decision
of the trial High court appealed against the judgment to this court. There is
only one ground of appeal that is the omnibus ground, that is, the judgment is against
the weight of evidence on record. By this ground of appeal, the respondent is inviting
this court to rehear the matter. In the case of Tuakwa vs. Bosom [2001-2002] SCGLR 61; the Supreme Court held that
appeal is by way of rehearing particularly where the appellant alleges in his
notice of appeal that the judgment is against the weight of evidence on record.
This legal position affirms what is stated in Rule 8 (1) of the Court of Appeal
Rules, 1997, C.I. 19. It provides as follows:<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;“(1)
Any appeal to the Court shall be by way of re-hearing and shall be brought by a
notice referred to in these rules as ‘the notice of appeal”.<o:p></o:p>Although it is not the duty of the
appellate court to evaluate the veracity or otherwise of any witness, it is
incumbent upon the court to analyze the entire record of appeal, take into account
the testimonies and all documentary evidence ad</main>