KUSI-APPIAH, J.A:
The simple issue in this appeal is the factual one of determining whether the plaintiff (now respondent) or her son Richard Peprah (now deceased) is the rightful owner of the disputed land.
In my view that issue was elaborately pleaded and adequately canvassed at the trial to obviate any blurring of it. I turn first to the pleadings. In paragraph 2, 3, 4 and 5 of the statement of claim, the plaintiff alleged that by virtue of an agreement concluded between her as purchaser and one DORIS LOLONYO HOTSE as the vendor evidenced by an indenture dated 20th day of June, 2000, she purchased the disputed property in this case and put her son Richard Peprah in occupation of same and left for the United States of America.
The plaintiff avers that Richard Peprah having passed away, defendant (now appellant) is currently in occupation of the disputed property without her consent for which reason the plaintiff demanded in vain that defendant immediately quit the disputed property and…