APPAU, JSC:-
The Court of Appeal, in a unanimous decision, affirmed the judgment of the trial High Court in favour of the plaintiff/respondent/respondent against the defendant/appellant/appellant in this land matter. In the said judgment, the trial High Court dismissed appellant’s counter-claim, which was also affirmed by the Court of Appeal. Aggrieved by the concurrent judgment of the Court of Appeal, the defendant/appellant/appellant has brought this appeal before us, praying for the reversal of same on the following grounds:
1. The Court of Appeal erred in coming to a conclusion that the identity, extent and size of the land, the subject-matter, was not in issue as same was one of agreed fact.
2. The Court erred by holding that Exhibit ‘B’, which is the judgment in the case of AMEODA v. PORDIER and AMEODA v. FORZI and Ors [1967] GLR 479; C.A., is binding on the defendant and operated as Estoppel per rem judicatam.
3. The Judgment was against the weight of evidence.
For …