KOFI SEGBEDZI, MOSES JUJI AND C. K. DAVORDZIE vs. ASHRIFIE AKRONG [2014]DLCA2799

Date	2014-07-10
Suit No.	CIVIL APPEAL NO. H1/82/2013
Citation No.	[2014]DLCA2799

KUSI-APPIAH J.A. (PRESIDING)

TORKORNOO (MRS.) J.A.

DZAMEFE J.A

MR. ANDREW APPAU OBENG FOR THE PLAINTIFFS/APPELLANTS

MS. EVA OKYERE FOR THE DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT

[2014]DLCA2799
																																						<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" >KOFI SEGBEDZI, MOSES JUJI
AND C. K. DAVORDZIE<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>&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;ASHRIFIE
AKRONG&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <o:p></o:p>[COURT OF APPEAL, ACCRA]<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">

CIVIL APPEAL NO. H1/82/2013&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;&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: 10TH JULY, 2014<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:&nbsp;&nbsp; <o:p></o:p>MR. ANDREW APPAU OBENG FOR
THE PLAINTIFFS/APPELLANTS,<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">

MS. EVA OKYERE 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 1.0pt 0in">

KUSI-APPIAH
J.A. (PRESIDING), TORKORNOO (MRS.) J.A.,
DZAMEFE J.A.<o:p></o:p>

</div>JUDGEMENT<o:p></o:p>KUSI-APPIAH,
J.A.: This is an appeal from the decision of the High Court
(Land Division), Accra, over a disputed ownership of a house situated at Nima,
a suburb of Accra, and numbered as E84/11.<o:p></o:p>The facts which gave
rise to the dispute were as follows:&nbsp; One
Kojo Akrong who died intestate in 1945 was the person who built the house.&nbsp; That was not disputed by the
plaintiffs/appellants.&nbsp; However,
plaintiffs averred that upon the demise of Kojo Akrong, the property in dispute
devolved on his children and between 1972 and 1983, Ibrahim Lassey Akrong whom
plaintiffs described as the eldest son of Kojo Akrong initially leased the
property to plaintiffs and subsequently sold same with the knowledge and
consent of his brothers and sisters to them.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The plaintiffs
alleged that the sale was evidenced by a conveyance duly executed by Lassey
Akrong in their favour.&nbsp; They contended
that after the sale, they assumed ownership and possession of the property
without any objection from any member of the family or siblings of Ibrahim
Lassey Akrong.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The plaintiff further
averred that in course of time, Ibrahim Lassey Akrong died and his only
surviving sister, Atswei Akrong also died in 1986.&nbsp; Subsequently, the defendant suddenly emerged,
claiming to be the eldest surviving son of the late Kojo Akrong and thus a
beneficial owner of the subject property which he claimed to be his family
property.&nbsp; He therefore issued a writ of
summons in the High Court claiming:<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>“a.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; A declaration that a valid transfer of
title has taken place on a piece of property known as H/No. E.84/11, Nima to
the three plaintiffs who are now the real owners of same.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>b.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; An order of perpetual injunction to
prohibit the defendant, his agents and successors from interfering with the
peace and quiet of plaintiffs to their property.”<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The defendant
resisted the plaintiffs claim by his statement of defence and counterclaim
filed on 9th October, 1997 and denied that the plaintiffs are
entitled to any of the reliefs claimed or at all.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The defendant’s
paragraphs 5, 6, 9, 11 and 12 of his statement of defence aforesaid, contain
the bedrock of his title to the land in dispute.&nbsp; They read:<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>“5.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; In an answer to paragraph 3 of the
plaintiffs’ statement of claim, the defendant says that he is the eldest child
of the late Kojo Akrong, and in his capacity as such states that there has been
no alienation of the property in dispute which is family property to the
plaintiffs or to any other persons and that even if Ibrahim Lassey purported to
sell the property to the plaintiffs, which is denied, then the purported
alienation is void, as no single family member can alienate family property
without the consent of the requisite family members.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>6.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; In further answer to paragraph 3 of the
statement of claim, the defendant says that at all times his brother Ibrahim
Lassey Akrong told him that the plaintiffs were monthly tenants in the house in
dispute.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>