EMMANUEL NUERTEYE AKWETEY, DR. ADUMUAH BOSSMAN, RICHARD NUERTEYE NORTEY AND DINA NORTEY SENYE ODJADAMLA vs. EMMANUEL DOKU AND 26 OTHERS [2016]DLCA8172

EMMANUEL NUERTEYE AKWETEY, DR. ADUMUAH BOSSMAN, RICHARD NUERTEYE NORTEY AND DINA... [2016]DLCA8172

Date	2016-04-14
Suit No.	SUIT NO. HI/10/2016
Citation No.	[2016]DLCA8172

GYAESAYOR J.A. (PRESIDING)

KWOFIE J.A.

AGYEMANG J.A.

RAY APPIAH – AMPONSAH FOR THE APPELLANTS

THOMAS HUGHES FOR THE RESPONDENTS

[2016]DLCA8172
																																						<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" >EMMANUEL
NUERTEYE AKWETEY, DR. ADUMUAH BOSSMAN, RICHARD NUERTEYE NORTEY AND DINA NORTEY
SENYE ODJADAMLA<o:p></o:p>(PLTF/APPELLANTS)<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>EMMANUEL DOKU
AND 26 OTHERS<o:p></o:p>(DEFT/RESPONDENTS)<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:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">

SUIT
NO. HI/10/2016&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; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;DATE:
14TH APRIL, 2016<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:<o:p></o:p>RAY
APPIAH – AMPONSAH FOR THE APPELLANTS<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">

THOMAS
HUGHES FOR THE RESPONDENTS<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:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">

GYAESAYOR
J.A. (PRESIDING), KWOFIE J.A., AGYEMANG 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:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">

<p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;
text-align:center;line-height:115%;border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0cm;mso-padding-alt:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">JUDGMENT<o:p></o:p>

</div>KWOFIE
J.A:<o:p></o:p>On
the 13th of June, 2013 the plaintiffs/applicants (who would be
referred to in the appeal as “the plaintiffs”) filed an appeal against the
ruling of the High Court Tema in which the trial Judge refused an application
for interlocutory injunction filed by the plaintiffs.<o:p></o:p>The brief facts of the case is that the
plaintiffs sued the defendants for a declaration of title to a parcel of land
approximately 3849.56 acres situate at Prampram, recovery of Possession, Damages
for trespass and Perpetual Injunction.&nbsp;
The plaintiff claimed that they had been in effective possession and
occupation of the said land which was their ancestral land from time immemorial.&nbsp; They averred that without the authority and
consent of the family, the defendants had entered their family land and carved
out portions thereof to themselves and alienated portions thereof to
strangers.&nbsp; The plaintiffs therefore
brought the application for interlocutory injunction to restrain the defendants
from committing further acts of trespass and to stop those farming on the land
from cultivating new farms.<o:p></o:p>The defendants on the other hand
challenged the capacity of the plaintiffs to institute this action and denied
that the plaintiffs families had been in possession and occupation of the land
since time immemorial. &nbsp;They contended
that they live and farm on lands which they had either inherited from their
forefathers or grants received from their various heads of families.&nbsp; They further contended that the plaintiffs
have no right or authority to prevent them from being in possession of land
acquired by first settlement by their forebears.&nbsp; They further contended that the land they
occupy does not exceed 250 acres.<o:p></o:p>Both parties filed their respective
affidavit in support and in opposition and written submission and the trial
Judge in his ruling of 4th June, 2013 refused the application.<o:p></o:p>Dissatisfied with the ruling, the
plaintiffs filed the interlocutory appeal on 13th June 2013 seeking
to set aside the ruling.&nbsp; The grounds of
appeal are:<o:p></o:p>1.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
The
ruling is against the weight of evidence.<o:p></o:p>2.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
The
learned Judge erred in law by holding that the motion for the interlocution
injunction was a repeat application.<o:p></o:p>3.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;