YAMAHA AMA KWABUA (DECEASED) vs. ALHAJI TANKO MOHAMMED AND ANOTHER. [2021]DLCA10077

Date	2021-02-10
Suit No.	SUIT NO.H1/200/2005
Citation No.	[2021]DLCA10077

CECILIA SOWAH J.A.(PRESIDING)

ANTHONY OPPONG J.A.

MENSAH-HOMIAH J.A.

K. AMOAKO ADJEI WITH ADWOA AMOAKO ADJEI ESQ FOR PLAINTIFF/RESPONDENT

SAMIR IBRAHIM ESQ FOR 1ST DEFENDANT/APPELLANT

[2021]DLCA10077
																																						<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" >YAMAHA AMA KWABUA (DECEASED)<o:p></o:p>(PLAINTIFF/RESPONDENT)<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>ALHAJI TANKO MOHAMMED AND ANOTHER.<o:p></o:p>(DEFENDANTS/ APPELLANTS)<o:p></o:p>[COURT
OF APPEAL, KOFORIDUAH]<o:p></o:p><div style="border-top: none; border-right: none; border-left: none; border-image: initial; border-bottom-width: 1.5pt; border-bottom-color: windowtext; padding: 0cm 0cm 1pt;">

SUIT NO.H1/200/2005&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &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 FEBRUARY
2021<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:<o:p></o:p>K.
AMOAKO ADJEI WITH ADWOA AMOAKO ADJEI ESQ FOR PLAINTIFF/RESPONDENT<o:p></o:p><div style="border-top: none; border-right: none; border-left: none; border-image: initial; border-bottom-width: 1.5pt; border-bottom-color: windowtext; padding: 0cm 0cm 1pt;">

SAMIR
IBRAHIM ESQ FOR 1ST DEFENDANT/APPELLANT<o:p></o:p>

</div>CORAM:
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <o:p></o:p>CECILIA SOWAH J.A.(PRESIDING), ANTHONY
OPPONG J.A., MENSAH-HOMIAH J.A.<o:p></o:p><div style="border-top-width: 1.5pt; border-top-color: windowtext; border-left: none; border-bottom-width: 1.5pt; border-bottom-color: windowtext; border-right: none; padding: 1pt 0cm;">

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

</div>&nbsp;ANTHONY
OPPONG,J.A.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;In 1997, one Yamaha Ama Kwabua caused
a writ of summons to issue against the 1st defendant at the Circuit
Court, Koforidua. While the matter was pending, the plaintiff died and since
the cause of action survived her, by an application filed somewhere in the year
2000 one Veronica Acheampong substituted for the deceased plaintiff. &nbsp;&nbsp;The reliefs plaintiff sought were declaration
of title to all that piece or parcel of land situate at Sector 3, Block 1, Plot
No. 111 in the New Juabeng District covering an approximate area of 0.37 acres
and bounded by Plot Nos. 112, 109/110 and an open space and perpetual
injunction against the defendant and his privies.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;The factual basis of plaintiff’s claim
as gleaned from the record was that in 1979 her husband acquired the land from
the Lands Commission, Koforidua who prepared a lease that was duly registered
as ER. 518/79 in her favour. Then somewhere in 1986, one Mr. B. A. Bediako
alleged that plaintiff’s acquired land covered a portion of his land and
demanded compensation and plaintiff consequently paid compensation to the said
Bediako.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;Plaintiff, as an act of possession and
ownership of the said land, put one Leo Kofi on the land as his caretaker. Leo Kofi
planted sugar cane and other crops on the land and remained in possession until
defendant entered the land. And the protests to defendant’s entry unto the land
culminated in the suit.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;Alhaji Mohammed Tanko, the Defendant, on
the other hand, claimed to have acquired the land from Nana Antwi Adjei who was
subsequently joined to the suit as second defendant. He claimed that in 1979,
the disputed land had not been demarcated into plots and so the grant of the
land to plaintiff by the Lands Commission was void, more so because the land is
not Government land. The defendant insisted that he had not committed any act
of trespass since his entry on the land was premised on legitimate and lawful
acquisition of the land from the real owners.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;Defendant counterclaimed for
declaration of title to the same Plot No. 111; an order for recovery of
possession and perpetual injunction and dismissal of plaintiff’s claim.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;It may be observed that one pertinent
issue that emanated from the respective cases of the parties was whether the
land is vested in Government of Ghana or it belonged to the 2nd
defendant’s family from whom 1st defendant acquired the land. To
this crucial issue the trial Court rightly, in our view, found that defendant
in the trial conceded that title in the land in dispute is vested in the
Government of Ghana in trust of the original owners of the land. Indeed at page
131 of the Record of Appeal, the trial Court stated that:<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;“The
defendant himself conceded that the title in the land is vested in the
Government of Ghana, so he ought to know that the co-defendant(2nd
defendant) has no interest which he could transfer to him(1st
defendant)” <o:p></o:p>&nbsp;It is important to note at this stage
that the fact that defendant conceded that the disputed land is government land
or is vested in the government is evidently manifest at page 111 of the Record
of Appeal where the following ensued in cross examination of appellant:<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;“Q. Do you know that interest in the land in New
Juabeng is vested<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
in the Government?<o:p></o:p>A.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
It is not all lands that are vested in
the Government<o:p></o:p>Q.&nbsp; Do you know if the land in dispute is vested
in the Government &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; or not?<o:p></o:p>