DJOMOA
V.
AMARGYEI

VAN LARE J.S.C.: His lordship referred to the facts here set out in the headnote and continued:] There had been four chiefs in succession on the Abirem stool including the defendant since 1928, that is, since the stool alienated that portion of its lands to the plaintiffs, and there is no suggestion that any of the three immediate predecessors of the defendant ever made any attempt to challenge the plaintiffs’ title or ownership of the area now in dispute. There is the uncontradicted evidence, on the other hand, that about the year 1950 in a case of Nana Karikari Appaw v. Nana Atwuma Mana1(1), concerning another portion of the Abirem stool lands, the Abiremhene, that is the defendant’s predecessor who was a defendant in that case, called the plaintiff in the instant case as a witness for the purpose of tendering exhibit A in support of his case that he was the overlord of the lands of which the area describe in exhibit A formed part and that he had been exercising acts of ownership in…