DUMEGAH AHADJI DODO AND 3 OTHERS vs. BRITISH TOBACCO COMPANYLTD. AND 2 OTHERS [2014]DLCA4639

Date	2014-01-23
Suit No.	CIVIL APPEAL SUIT NO.H1/90/2012
Citation No.	[2014]DLCA4639

APALOO JA (PRESIDING)

GYAESAYOR JA

ADUAMA OSEI JA

KUDJAWU & CO FOR 1ST DEFENDANT/APPELLANT

S. Y. YEGBEY ESQ FOR 2ND DEFENDANT/APPELLANT

KPATSA & ASSOCIATES FOR PLAINTIFFS/RESPONDETS

[2014]DLCA4639
																																						<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" >DUMEGAH
AHADJI DODO AND 3 OTHERS<o:p></o:p>(PLAINITFFS)<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>BRITISH
TOBACCO COMPANYLTD. AND 2 OTHERS<o:p></o:p>(DEFENDANTS)<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</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 SUIT NO.H1/90/2012&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; &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: 23RD
JANUARY, 2014<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:<o:p></o:p>KUDJAWU
&amp; CO FOR 1ST DEFENDANT/APPELLANT<o:p></o:p>S.
Y. YEGBEY ESQ FOR 2ND DEFENDANT/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">

KPATSA
&amp; ASSOCIATES FOR PLAINTIFFS/RESPONDETS<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">

APALOO
JA (PRESIDING), GYAESAYOR JA, ADUAMA OSEI JA<o:p></o:p>

</div> <div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">

<p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;
text-align:center;border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in;mso-padding-alt:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">JUDGMENT<o:p></o:p>

</div>APALOO
JA;&nbsp;&nbsp; This is an appeal from the decision of the
High Court Ho, dated 30th July 2010.&nbsp;
The lower Court gave judgment in favour of the
Plaintiffs/Respondents.&nbsp; We deem it
appropriate to refer to the parties by the designation given to them in the
course of the trial in the Court below.<o:p></o:p>The Defendants
dissatisfied with the Judgment filed their notices of appeal in which they
attacked the decision of the Court.&nbsp; The
2nd Defendant’s notice of appeal which was first in time filed on
10/08/10 had 3 grounds of appeal.&nbsp; These
were;<o:p></o:p>1)&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
“The
judgment is against the weight of evidence.<o:p></o:p>2)&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
The
learned trial judge erred by presuming and/or holding that the plaintiffs had
capacity to sue as the lawful representatives of Fievie State.<o:p></o:p>3)&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
The
learned trial Judge erred by failing or refusing to uphold the validity of the
Government’s acquisition of land which was registered at the Deeds Registry as
No. 1244/1954 and covered by certificate of title.”<o:p></o:p>On 30/08/10 a notice of
appeal was again filed on behalf of the 1st and 2nd
Defendants on the following 10 grounds. <o:p></o:p><ol style="margin-top:0in" start="1" type="a">
 <li class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify;mso-list:l1 level1 lfo2">“The Learned Trial
 Judge misdirected himself and thereby failed to advert his mind to the
 relevant evidence on record in the determination of the validity of the 1st
 and 2nd defendants’ title to the land in dispute which was
 based on the Government’s paramount title by the acquisition of the land
 in dispute in 1954 by virtue of the Public Lands Ordinance (CAP 113).<o:p></o:p></li>
 <li class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify;mso-list:l1 level1 lfo2">The Learned Trial
 Judge misdirected himself and thereby erred in law by holding that the
 Coun</main>