SAMPSON OBENG AND KWAME MENSAH vs. KWABENA MENSAH (SUING FOR HIMSELF & ON BEHALF OF ALL HIS SIBLINGS) [2019]DLSC6579

SAMPSON OBENG AND KWAME MENSAH vs. KWABENA MENSAH (SUING FOR HIMSELF & ON BEHALF... [2019]DLSC6579

Date	2019-07-17
Suit No.	CIVIL APPEAL NO. J4/78/2018
Citation No.	[2019]DLSC6579

GBADEGBE JSC (PRESIDING)

BENIN JSC

APPAU JSC

PWAMANG JSC

KOTEY JSC

KWAME A. BOAFO FOR THE DEFENDANTS/APPELLANST/APPELLANTS

BENJAMIN OSEI BOATENG FOR THE PLAINTIFF/RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT

[2019]DLSC6579
																																						<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://dennislawgh.com/dl-assets/dl-images/lock-content.png"
																				alt="Subscription based content">
																		</div>
																	</div>
																	 
																		<a href="https://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" >SAMPSON
OBENG AND KWAME MENSAH&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <o:p></o:p>(DEFENDANTS/APPELLANTS/APPELLANTS)<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>KWABENA
MENSAH (SUING FOR HIMSELF &amp; ON BEHALF OF ALL HIS SIBLINGS)<o:p></o:p>(PLAINTIFF/RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT)<o:p></o:p>[SUPREME COURT ACCRA]<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">

<p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;
text-align:center;border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in;mso-padding-alt:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">CIVIL
APPEAL NO. J4/78/2018&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; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; DATE: 17TH JULY, 2019<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL<o:p></o:p>KWAME
A. BOAFO FOR THE DEFENDANTS/APPELLANST/APPELLANTS.<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">

BENJAMIN OSEI BOATENG FOR THE
PLAINTIFF/RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT.<o:p></o:p>

</div>CORAM:&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
<o:p></o:p>GBADEGBE
JSC (PRESIDING), BENIN JSC, APPAU JSC, PWAMANG JSC, KOTEY JSC<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border-top:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
border-left:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;border-right:none;
padding:1.0pt 0in 1.0pt 0in">

<p class="MsoNoSpacing" align="center" style="text-align:center;line-height:115%;
border:none;mso-border-top-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;mso-border-bottom-alt:
solid windowtext 1.5pt;padding:0in;mso-padding-alt:1.0pt 0in 1.0pt 0in">JUDGMENT<o:p></o:p>

</div><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>THE UNANIMOUS
JUDGMENT OF THE COURT IS READ BY GBADEGBE, JSC AS FOLLOWS:-<o:p></o:p>GBADEGBE:<o:p></o:p>We have before us in the exercise of our appellate
jurisdiction, an appeal from the judgment of the Court of Appeal (CA) by which
the decision of the trial High Court was varied in part. In the judgment on
appeal to us, the learned justices agreed with the lower court’s findings of
fact but varied the consequential awards. While the variation of relief 2
relating to an order of perpetual injunction was essentially a different
formulation of that which was granted by the trial court, relief 1 was varied
in substance to include children and descendants of the plaintiff’s uncle-
Opanyin Kwadwo Gyebi.&nbsp; The variation to
the order made regarding relief 2 inserted the words; “the children of Opanyin
Kwadwo Gyebi and their descendants” to the persons whose beneficial interest in
the disputed property was acknowledged in the judgment of the trial court.&nbsp; Following the said judgment, the defendants/
appellants/ appellants (defendants) launched the instant appeal seeking a
variation of the judgment in their favor. &nbsp;For reasons of convenience, in these
proceedings the plaintiff/respondent/respondent will bear the description of
plaintiff.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>In the notice of appeal, the defendants attacked
the judgment of the CA on the following grounds:<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>1.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
The judgment is
against the weight of the evidence.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>2.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
The Court of Appeal
was wrong in declaring the children of Opanyin Kwasi Sarfo and their
descendants, the children of Opanyin Kwadwo Gyebi&nbsp; &nbsp;and
their descendants are beneficiary owners of House No 27, Block 6, Old Tafo,
Kumasi.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>3.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
The Court of
Appeal erred in restraining the Defendants/ Appellants/ Appellants and or Agona
Petenyinase family and their respective privies, assigns, workmen and anybody
claiming in trust for them from interfering with the beneficiaries’ occupation
and use of House No 27, Block 6, Old Tafo, Kumasi.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>4.