ERNESTINA OWUSU FRIMPONG vs. MR. BINEY & MRS. JANET BINEY [2014]DLCA4726

Date	2014-06-12
Suit No.	CIVIL APPEAL SUIT NO.H1/256/2010
Citation No.	[2014]DLCA4726

C. J. HONYENUGA J.A (PRESIDING)

D. ADJEI J.A

B. F. ACKAH-YENSU J.A

G. CARSON FOR DEFENDANTS/APPELLANTS

DANIEL ARTHUR FOR PLAINTIFF/RESPONDENT

[2014]DLCA4726
																																						<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" >ERNESTINA OWUSU FRIMPONG<o:p></o:p>(PLAINTIFF/APPELLANT)<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>MR. BINEY &amp; MRS.
JANET BINEY<o:p></o:p>(DEFENDANTS/RESPONDENTS)<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>[COURT
OF APPEAL, CAPE COAST]<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.H1/256/2010&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: 12TH JUNE, 2014<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:<o:p></o:p>G. CARSON FOR
DEFENDANTS/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">

DANIEL
ARTHUR FOR PLAINTIFF/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">

C.
J. HONYENUGA J.A (PRESIDING), D. ADJEI J.A, B. F. ACKAH-YENSU J.A<o:p></o:p>

</div><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p><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>BARBARA
ACKAH-YENSU, JA<o:p></o:p>The fundamental issue for
determination in this appeal, in our opinion, is whether or not the layout of
the land in dispute is the same in the old documents covering the land as in
the new documents which were prepared by the Lands Commission after the Parties
had purchased land from the same grantor.<o:p></o:p>The genesis of this case is
that the Plaintiff/Appellant (hereinafter simply referred to as “the
Plaintiff”) sued the Defendants/Respondents (also to be referred to as “the
Defendants”) in the District Court sitting in Elmina, for a declaration of
title, damages for trespass and ancillary reliefs. The Defendants also
counterclaimed for similar reliefs and the trial was conducted by the Parties themselves
without the benefit of Counsel, although they filed pleadings.<o:p></o:p>The trial Magistrate dismissed
the Plaintiff’s action and gave judgment for the Defendants on their
counterclaim on 21st February, 2008 (see page 80-82 of ROA).&nbsp; Being aggrieved by this decision, the Plaintiff
appealed to the High Court, Cape Coast as per the Notice of Appeal at page 87
of the ROA.&nbsp; The High Court delivered its
judgment on 20th October, 2009 (page 118-124 of ROA).&nbsp; The present appeal is against the judgment of
the High Court.<o:p></o:p>By the said judgment, the High
Court allowed the Plaintiff’s appeal and set aside the judgment of the District
Court, and instead entered judgment for the Plaintiff on her claims which she
brought before the trial District Court. Being dissatisfied with the said
judgment, the Defendants appealed per their Notice of Appeal on the following
grounds:<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; “(i)
That the judgment is against the weight of evidence <o:p></o:p>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; adduced at the trial before the District Magistrate.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;(ii) That since an appeal is by way of rehearing
the learned <o:p></o:p>High
Court Judge failed in granting the Appellants who were Respondents in his Court
an opportunity to know in advance the case to be made against them.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;(iii) That the procedure adopted effectively
denied the <o:p></o:p>Appellants
a hearing.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;(iv) That the learned High Court Judge erred
in deciding the <o:p></o:p>