EMMANUEL K. AZAMETI vs. DINGLE DORDZI ATTIPOE AND KWAKU NYATEFE [2023]DLSC16115

Date	2023-03-15
Suit No.	CIVIL APPEAL NO. J4/04/2022
Citation No.	[2023]DLSC16115

BAFFOE-BONNIE JSC (PRESIDING)

OWUSU (MS.) JSC

TORKORNOO (MRS.) JSC

ACKAH-YENSU (MS.) JSC

ASIEDU JSC

NELSON MAWUTOR KPORHA ESQ. FOR THE PLAINTIFF/APPELLANT/ RESPONDENT.

DR. JOE ATTIPOE ESQ. FOR THE DEFENDANTS/RESPONDENTS/APPELLANTS.

[2023]DLSC16115
																																						<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 K. AZAMETI<o:p></o:p>(PLAINTIFF/APPELLANT/RESPONDENT)<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p><a name="_heading=h.gjdgxs"></a>DINGLE DORDZI
ATTIPOE AND KWAKU NYATEFE<o:p></o:p>(DEFENDANTS/RESPONDENTS/APPELLANTS) <o:p></o:p>[SUPREME
COURT, ACCRA]<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;">

CIVIL APPEAL NO.
J4/04/2022&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:
15TH MARCH 2023<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL <o:p></o:p>NELSON
MAWUTOR KPORHA ESQ. FOR THE PLAINTIFF/APPELLANT/<o:p></o:p>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;">

<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;text-align:justify;line-height:
normal;tab-stops:82.3pt;border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0cm;mso-padding-alt:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">DR. JOE ATTIPOE ESQ. FOR THE DEFENDANTS/RESPONDENTS/APPELLANTS.<o:p></o:p>

</div>CORAM&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <o:p></o:p>BAFFOE-BONNIE JSC (PRESIDING), OWUSU (MS.) JSC,
TORKORNOO (MRS.) JSC<o:p></o:p>ACKAH-YENSU (MS.) JSC, ASIEDU JSC&nbsp; <o:p></o:p><div style="border-top-width: 1.5pt; border-top-color: black; border-left: none; border-bottom-width: 1.5pt; border-bottom-color: black; border-right: none; padding: 1pt 0cm;">

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

</div>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <o:p></o:p>ASIEDU JSC:-<o:p></o:p>INTRODUCTION:<o:p></o:p>My
lords, this appeal is against the judgment of the Court of Appeal, sitting at
Ho in the Volta Region, which was delivered on the 18th day of
December 2019. In this judgment, the Plaintiff/Appellant/Respondent will be
referred to as the Plaintiff whiles the Defendants/Respondents/Appellants will
retain their original designation as Defendants in the matter. The Court of
Appeal, had, in its judgment, reversed the judgment of the High Court which had
declared title in a disputed area of land in the Defendants and thus,
effectively, making the Plaintiff the owner of the said parcel of land.
Aggrieved by the judgment of the Court of Appeal therefore, the Defendants
filed the instant appeal on the 4th March 2020 and pray this Court,
by way of relief, to set aside the judgment of the Court of Appeal and restore
the judgment of the High Court dated the 12th December 2016.<o:p></o:p>GROUNDS OF APPEAL:<o:p></o:p>The
grounds for the Defendants’ appeal are:<o:p></o:p>(a). That the Court of Appeal
woefully failed to adequately consider the case of the
Defendants/Respondents/Appellants thereby occasioning substantial miscarriage
of justice.<o:p></o:p>(b). That the judgment is
against the weight of evidence.<o:p></o:p>(c). That the Court of Appeal
erred in granting judgment for the Plaintiff/Appellant/Respondent in the light
of the finding of the court that the Plaintiff/Appellant/Respondent failed to
indicate the size of the land.<o:p></o:p>(d). That the Court of Appeal
erred in holding that Defendants/Respondents/Appellants did not adduce any
evidence of long unchallenged possession and occupation in respect to the
specific area of dispute.<o:p></o:p>(e). That the Court of Appeal
erred in holding that the evidence of PW1, PW2, PW3 and PW4 were consistent and
corroborative of Plaintiff/Appellant/Respondent’s case.<o:p></o:p>(f). That the Court of Appeal
erred in holding that the deficiency in Exhibits 1 and 2 by reason of the lack
of any form of description could not be so cured by Defendants/Respondents/Appellants
long, unchallenged, overt and transparent acts of ownership so as to defeat the
interest of the Plaintiff/Appellant/Respondent regarding the specific boundary
between Plaintiff/Appellant/Respondent and Defendants/Respondents/Appellants <o:p></o:p>(g). That the Court of Appeal
erred in holding that DW1 and DW2 did nothing to help the
Defendants/Respondents/Appellants’ case regarding the
Defendants/Respondents/Appellants’ ownership of the area claimed by the
Plaintiff/Appellant/Respondent.<o:p></o:p>(h). That the Court of Appeal
erred in holding that in the recent event involving PW1 and his maize
cultivation the parties accepted the burnt toti tree as the boundary that PW1
had not respected.<o:p></o:p>