DICK YAW NSIAH vs. NANA MBEAH [2016]DLCA4630

Date	2016-06-08
Suit No.	SUIT NO: H1/06/2016
Citation No.	[2016]DLCA4630

ADJEI J.A

SOWAH J.A

MENSAH J.A

K. AMOAKO ADJEI ESQ. WITH HIM SULEMANA MUSAH ESQ

FOR THE PLAINTIFF/APPLICANT/APPELLANT.

WIAFE DANKWA ESQ FOR THE DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT

[2016]DLCA4630
																																						<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" >DICK YAW NSIAH<o:p></o:p>(PLAINTIFF/APPELLANT)<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>NANA MBEAH<o:p></o:p>(DEFENDANT/RESONDENT)<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>[COURT OF APPEAL, KOFORIDUA]<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">

SUIT
NO: H1/06/2016&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: 8TH JUNE, 2016<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:<o:p></o:p>K. AMOAKO ADJEI ESQ. WITH
HIM SULEMANA MUSAH ESQ. FOR THE PLAINTIFF/APPLICANT/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">

WIAFE
DANKWA ESQ FOR THE DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT/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">

ADJEI
J.A, SOWAH J.A, MENSAH J.A<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>ADJEI,J.A:<o:p></o:p>The
High Court Koforidua on 2nd December, 2014 dismissed an application for
interlocutory injunction filed by the Plaintiff&nbsp;to restrain the Defendant,
his agents, privies, assigns and representatives from entering unto the land,
subject matter in dispute. The Plaintiff dissatisfied with the ruling by the
High Court filed an appeal against the said ruling to this Court on 22nd
December, 2014.&nbsp; The Plaintiff /Appellant and the Defendant /Respondent
shall maintain their respective designations at the court below for convenience
and ease of reference.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The
brief facts of the matter before the trial High Court which has culminated in
this interlocutory appeal were that the Plaintiff acquired&nbsp;a parcel of
land situate ,lying and being at Kyekyewere-Beposo near&nbsp; Suhum and bounded
by the properties of Prempeh, Yawtse, Gyamfua and the Kumasi - Accra motor road
from the Borby family of Suhum acting by the head of family Kofi Borby with the
consent and concurrence of the principal members of the said family. A deed of
conveyance was executed in favour of the Plaintiff by the Borby family and was
subsequently registered by the Lands Commission with registry number
4/2001.&nbsp; The Plaintiff took effective possession of the land after its
acquisition and was in undisturbed possession until 2013 when the Defendant entered
unto the land and asserted ownership to same.&nbsp; The Defendant on the other
hand claims that his stool acquired the land from the Akwamus through conquests
several centuries ago and all the people occupying portions of the acquired
land including Borby's family are licencees to the stool. The Defendant claims
that on noticing the Plaintiff on the land, he warned him to abate his
trespassory act by vacating the land peaceably but the Plaintiff failed to
comply with his directives.<o:p></o:p> 
The trial High Court Judge dismissed the Plaintiff's application on the basis
that the Defendant is acting on behalf of his stool and the stool wanted to
develop the land for the benefit of the people in the community and therefore
the communal interest should override the Plaintiff's individual
interest.&nbsp; It was further held that payment of compensation to the
Plaintiff would address any injury that the Plaintiff may suffer and the trial
judge accordingly dismissed the Plaintiff's interlocutory application for injunction.
The Plaintiff dissatisfied with the principles and the reasoning behind the
ruling by the trial High Court Judge appealed against the said ruling to this
Court for same to be reversed and his prayer granted. There are two grounds of
appeal and they are that the ruling is against the weight of evidence and, furthermore,
the judge erred in relying on extraneous matters not canvassed by the
Defendant.<o:p></o:p> 
&nbsp;An appellant who alleges that a ruling
is against the weight of evidence on record is inviting the appellate court to rehear
the appeal and come to the conclusion that the trial judge erred when he heard
the application. The duty is on the appellant to demonstrate the errors
committed by the trial court. The errors as in the case in point may be wrong
application of law or fact or both and if the said errors are corrected, it
should lead to the reversal of the ruling. We shall discuss both grounds of
appeal together as the ground (b) which alleges that the trial judge took into
consideration extraneous matters could be discussed under the omnibus ground
that the ruling is against the weight of evidence on record.<o:p></o:p>