Customer Support

ATTAH
V.
LAGOS

(1960) JELR 67216 (HC)

High Court 18 Mar 1960 Ghana
BriefBot icon

BriefBot Summary

Free

- The judgment appealed from is not supported because it did not consider the fact that the disputed area was originally cultivated by someone other than the Andoe Stool. - The Andoe Stool did not have the right to possession or occupation

Case Details

Judges:ADUMUA-BOSSMAN J.
Counsel:SHORT FOR PLAINTIFF; DEFENDANT IN PERSON.
Other Citations:[1960] GLR 42, [1960] GLR 42 - 45

ADUMUA-BOSSMAN J.

In this appeal form a decision of the Native Court “B” of the Asin Local Council, the judgment appealed from does not seem to me to be capable of support. That judgment did not take any account of the admitted fact that when the area in dispute was alleged to have been cultivated originally by Kojo Alata, defendant’s father (now deceased), that original cultivation was not in right or title of the Andoe Stool at all, but of a woman cal led Adwua Brenua of Anomaboe. It follows, therefore, that so far as the Andoe Stool is concerned, it never gave any right of occupation or possession of that disputed area, or the adjoining or any other area, to the defendant’s late father.

When, therefore, as the result of litigation between the Andoe Stool and Kojo Alata’s grantor, a decision was given against her, and a declaration of ownership made in favour of the Andoe Stool, it is clear that Kojo Alata and his successors had no inherent right as against the Andoe Stool to the poss…

There's more. Sign in to continue reading.

judy.legal is the comprehensive database of case law and legislation from Ghana, Kenya and Nigeria. Gain seamless access to over 77,000 cases, recent judgments, statutes, and rules of court.