Abaahom and Another v Atta and Others (H1/43/25) [2026] GHACA 10 (28 May 2026)

NANA ABAAHOM III @ ALHAJI OBI & ANOR V. EBUSUAPANYIN KOJO ATTA & 3 ORS -

Judgment

pg. 1 IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF JUDICATURE IN THE COURT OF APPEAL SEKONDI, 2026

Coram

SAMUEL OBENG-DIAWUO, J.A (PRESIDING) BARIMA YAW KODIE OPPONG, J.A FRANKLINA GESILA ADANU, J.A

SUIT NO: H1/43/25 28TH MAY 2026

1. NANA ABAAHOM III @ ALHAJI OBI

2. ALHAJI ABUBAKR ANDERSON--------- PLAINTIFFS/APPELLANTS

VERSUS

1. EBUSUAPANYIN KOJO ATTA

2. TUFUHEN KWASI KETU IV--------DEFENDANTS/RESPONDENTS

3. KOFI ADAM AFADZI

4. KWEKU TAWIAH

FRANKLINA GESILA ADANU, J.A: 1.0 General Overview This is an appeal against the decision of the High Court delivered on 13/05/2024. According to Goodreads, a notable quote on fairness and justice by U.S. Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart is: “Fairness is what justice really is.” NANA ABAAHOM III @ ALHAJI OBI & ANOR V. EBUSUAPANYIN KOJO ATTA & 3 ORS -

pg. 2 2.0 Facts: The Appellants in this case were originally seven (7) in number as of 21/10/2021, when the Writ of Summons was issued. The present two

(2) Appellants together with Nana Kwesi Andoh II (suing for themselves and on behalf of Ekumfi Immuna Community) and Nana Odwiren Ababio VII with Ebusuapanyin Kofi Bekoe (suing for themselves and on behalf of Odomna Family of Immuna) as well as Ebusuapanyin Kofi Gyapoh and Opanyin Sumaila (suing for themselves and on behalf of Kojo Andam Twidan Family of Immuna) originally issued a Writ of Summons and Statement of Claim against the Respondents who were also numbered six (6) in total. They were Ex-Tufuhen Kwesi Kwetu III (a.k.a. Amoa Anderson), Ebusuapanyin Kojo Atta, Tufuhen Kwesi Ketu IV, Safohen Kojo Annan, Kojo Afadzi and Kweku Tawiah.

In the course of the suit, the first Defendant, Ex-Tufuhen Kwesi Kwetu III (a.k.a. Amoa Anderson) died. Pursuant to a Notice of Discontinu ance filed on 18/07/2022, the Plaintiffs discontinued the case against him. The Writ was accordingly amended to remove his name on 24/01/2023. Subsequently, Nana Odwiren Ababio VII and Ebusuapanyin Kofi Bekoe, who were the first two

(2) Plaintiffs on the original Writ representing the Odomna Family of Immuna applied to the court to be disjoined from the suit and the court granted their application on 06/06/2023 (ROA 169 -172, 177). Another application for disjoinder was filed on 26/06/2023 by Ebusuapanyin Kofi Gyapoh and Opanyin Sumaila (suing for themselves and on behalf of Kojo Andam Twidan Family of Immuna), and the court granted their prayer on 27/06/2023. On 30/06/2023, the Writ of Summons was again amended to reflect the disputing parties.

Pursuant to an order of this Court dated 19/01/2025, the third Plaintiff/Appellant (Nana Kwesi Andoh II) and third Defendant/Respondent (Safohen Kojo Annan) were also struck out from the suit , leaving the present Appellants and Respondents in this appeal. NANA ABAAHOM III @ ALHAJI OBI & ANOR V. EBUSUAPANYIN KOJO ATTA & 3 ORS -

pg. 3 2.1 Plaintiffs/Appellants’ Case (“Appellants”) By the amended Writ of Summons filed on 30/06/2023 pursuant to leave of court granted on 06/06/2023, the Appellants sought the following reliefs:

“ a. A declaration that by the Consent Judgment in the High Court titled Chief Kwame Odwiren Ababaio & 3 Ors Vrs Ebusuapanyin Koto Atta VII & 2 Ors ( Suit No. E1/23/2012 dated 14th July, 2015, the Defendants cannot alienate parcels of Ekumfi Immuna lands to third parties without the consultation, consent and approval of the Plaintiffs, the Kojo Andam Twidan Family of Immuna and the Odomna Family of Immuna.

b. An order nullifying all sales, grants or alienations of parcels of Ekumfi Immuna lands to third parties by the Defendants without the consultation, consent and approval of the Plaintiffs, the Kojo Andam Twidan Family of Immuna and the Odomna Family of Immuna.

c. An order of Perpetual Injunction restraining the Defendants, their relatives, agents, assigns, privies and any persons claiming through them from in any way selling, granting, alienating or developing parcels of Ekumfi Immuna lands without the consultation consent and approval of the Plaintiffs, the Kojo Andam Twidan Family of Immuna and the Odomna Family of Immuna. d. Any other relief that this Court may deem fit to grant.”

In the said amended Statement of Claim, the Appellants stated that they are part of the principal elders of Ekumfi Immuna Community who have instituted the action in their respective capacities and on behalf of the Community. The first Appellant is the Head of all Families in Ekumfi Immuna Town known as “Nguabafo Panyin” and the second Appellant is the Town Linguist. The Appellants described the Respondents as the Head of the Kwesi Ketu Twidan family of Ekumfi Immuna, present Tufuhene of Ekumfi Immuna or a member of NANA ABAAHOM III @ ALHAJI OBI & ANOR V. EBUSUAPANYIN KOJO ATTA & 3 ORS -

pg. 4 the Kwesi Ketu Twidan family of Ekumfi Immuna and principal elders of the Kwesi Ketu Twidan family of Ekumfi Immuna, respectively. The Appellants also asserted that apart from the Respondent’s family, the other families whose interests are concerned in the subject matter are the Kojo Andam Twidan family of Immuna whose head of family is Ebusuapanyin Kofi Gyapoh and the Odomna family whose head is Ebusuapanyin Kofi Bekoe, who have voluntarily withdrawn from the suit. The Appellants stated that the predecessors of the parties in this suit and that of the Kojo Andam Twidan family of Immuna and the Odomna family of Ekumfi Immuna executed an agreement on 08/12/1953. The said agreement stipulated and vested the communal ownership of all Immuna lands in the Kojo Andam Twidan family, the Odomna family, the Kwesi Ketu family of Immuna and the citizens of Immuna community. According to the Appellants, the Kojo Andam Twidan family of Immuna and the Kwesi Ketu family of Immuna were one inseparable Twidan family of Immuna at the time the agreement was executed in 1953. The family is currently divided into respective lineages of Kwesi Ketu and Kojo Andam Twidan families of Immuna. The Appellants assert that the 1953 agreement further fixed the sharing ratios of all proceeds from the land, dues and payments collected from activities of farmers and fishermen at Immuna among the families of the parties, the Odomna family of Immuna and the Immuna community.

They further state that sometime in 2012, the Appellants and/or their predecessors and that of the Kojo Andam Twidan of Immuna and the Odomna family of Immuna had reason to bring an action against the Respondents in the High Court, Cape Coast when the Respondents sought to alienate, grant and sell portions of the Immuna lands to third parties without the consent, consultation and approval of the Appellants and/or the Immuna community, Odomna family and Kojo Andam Twidan families of Immuna. According to the Appellants, this matter was settled out of court and terms of settlement filed and adopted by the court. It is NANA ABAAHOM III @ ALHAJI OBI & ANOR V. EBUSUAPANYIN KOJO ATTA & 3 ORS -

pg. 5 the Appellants’ claim that the said terms affirmed the communal ownership of all Immuna lands and provided a new sharing ratio of all proceeds from the Immuna lands, dues, tolls and payments collected from farms and fishermen of Immuna. Notwithstanding the said consent judgment, the Respondents purport and have proceeded to alienate parcels of Immuna lands to third parti es without any consultation, consent or approval from the Appellants, Kojo Andam Twidan of Immuna and the Odomna family of Immuna who are stakeholders with interest in the Immuna lands. The Appellants say that the terms of the consent judgment are binding on all parties in the suit and therefore, the Respondents are estopped from asserting the contrary. The Appellants assert that by Respondents’ conduct, they seek to pocket proceeds of their unlawful sale of Immuna lands to their detriment and that of the whole Immuna community, in breach of the terms of the consent judgment. Therefore, unless restrained by the Court, the Respondents will continue to engage in their unlawful acts of alienating parts of the said lands and pocketing the proceeds therefrom to the detriment of the Appellants, evidenced by the purported sale to Mrs. Willie Mae Penny and Mr. Arthur Penny in 2018.

2.2 Defendants/Respondents’ Case (“Respondents”) The Respondents denied the claims of the Appellants in their amended defence filed on 03/03/2023 pursuant to leave of the court granted on 27/02/2023. They asserted that the Immuna Community is fully aware that the Immuna lands belong to the Respondents and their members have at all material times approached only the Respondents for grant of various lands. The Respondents further admitted the Consent Judgment of 08/12/1953, but the terms were in respect of only proceeds, dues and payments regarding palm and coconut trees and “Amandze” usually paid or collected from non-indigenous fishermen to Immuna. The Respondents claim that the Appellants know that Immuna lands belong to the Respondents’ family as allodial owners. The Respondents stated that they have prior judgment and registration of Immuna lands since 1949 and 1978 respectively, all NANA ABAAHOM III @ ALHAJI OBI & ANOR V. EBUSUAPANYIN KOJO ATTA & 3 ORS -

pg. 6 confirming their allodial ownership of their Immuna lands. The Respondents further asserted that their family has, from age-old time, exercised control and possession over Immuna lands without any protest, interference or hindrance from any quarters till now.

It is the case of the Respondents that the Appellants are presently giving a wrong interpretation to paragraph two of the terms and settlement dated 14/07/2015, the subject matter of this suit, despite their awareness that it is only limited to proceeds, dues and payments in respect of palm and coconut trees and “Amandze” usually paid or collected from non-indigenous fishermen to Immuna and does not affect the sale of individual family lands owned by the allodial owners. The Respondents therefore reiterated that the said terms of settlement signed by the parties did not include the sale of lands and denied the Appellants’ claims.

In the Appellants reply to the Respondents amended statement of defence filed on 09/03/2023, the Appellants stated that no judgment has decreed that all Immuna lands are owned exclusively by the Respondents’ family as they allege. The Appellants further asserted that the 1953 agreement and the subsequent consent judgment affirmed the communal ownership of Immuna lands by the respective factions or families of the parties in the suit. They further stated that they resisted all attempts by the Respondents’ family to alienate lands in Immuna to the exclusion of Appellants’ families and factions, which culminated in the action instituted in the High Court in 2012.

3.0 The Trial Court On 17/03/2023, the following issues were set down for trial at the close of pleadings:

NANA ABAAHOM III @ ALHAJI OBI & ANOR V. EBUSUAPANYIN KOJO ATTA & 3 ORS -

pg. 7 a. Whether or not, per the agreement dated 8th December, 1953 and the Consent Judgment in the suit titled Chief Kwame Odwiren Ababio & 3 Ors versus Ebusuapanyin Kojo Atta & 2 Ors (Suit No. E1/23/2012) dated 14/07/2013, all Ekumfi Immuna lands belong to the parties jointly. b. Whether or not the Defendants’ Kwesi Ketu Twidan Family can alienate Ekumfi Immuna lands to third parties without the authority, consent and approval of the Plaintiffs. c. Any other issues arising out of the pleadings.

The Appellants’ first witness was Kenneth Obosu, an elder of Oman of Immuna or Immuna Community. He testified that his late father was a member of the third and fourth Appellants and Respondents’ Twidan Family, which is now separated into two factions. He tendered in evidence a copy of the agreement dated 08/12/1953 executed by the Twidan, Odumna and Oman Families as Exhibit “A”.

He also produced Exhibit “B” which was a 1997 court suit regarding a sale of a portion of Immuna land by the Respondent’s family without notice to the Odumna family and Oman of Immuna, Suit N o. 34/94 titled Ebusuapanyin Kweku Minta & 2 Ors vrs. DODDAB Salt Industries Ltd, which was settled by Terms of Settlement signed by the predecessors of all the parties in the suit purportedly acknowledging the communal ownership of the lands.

Exhibit “C” was tendered in evidence as the 2012 Suit No. E1/23/2012 in the Cape Coast High Court by the Appellants predecessors, when the Respondents sought to alienate, grant and sell portions of the Immuna lands to third parties without the approval of the Appellants’ families and the Immuna Community, titled Chief Kwame Odwiren Ababio & 3 Ors vrs Ebusuapanyin Koto Atta VII & 2 Ors.

NANA ABAAHOM III @ ALHAJI OBI & ANOR V. EBUSUAPANYIN KOJO ATTA & 3 ORS -

pg. 8 Exhibit “D” was the out-of-court settlement in respect of Suit No. E1/23/2012 and the Terms of Settlement, which was filed and adopted by the court as consent judgment on 08/07/2015.

A copy of the search report conducted by the Appellants in relation to the purported 2018 alienation of land by the Respondents to Mrs. Willie Mae Penny and Mr. Arthur Penny without the consent of the Appellants was exhibited as “E”.

Exhibit “F” was also produced as another search report evidencing a purported sale by the Respondents to a third party without the approval of the Appellants.

Exhibit “G” Series were pictures of some portions of Immuna lands graded by some third parties purportedly confirming that the Respondents are still selling lands without Appellants’ consent.

On the part of the Respondents, the second Respondent (Tufuhen Kwesi Ketu IV) testified on their behalf that the consent judgment does not restrict his family from alienating parcels of their Ekumfi lands. He exhibited the 08/12/1953 agreement which was allegedly circumvented/thwarted by a recent agreement entered into as Exhibit 1 and 1A.

He also produced Exhibit 2, which was the judgment the Respondents (Twifo family of Immuna) obtained against the Appellants when the Respondents litigated over their lands with the Asona family of Immuna.

On 19/06/1978, his predecessor, Nana Kwesi Ketu III made a declaration in respect of the Respondents’ Twidan family lands of Immuna and took steps to register same to the knowledge of the Appellants, but they never protested. This registration was exhibited as 3.

NANA ABAAHOM III @ ALHAJI OBI & ANOR V. EBUSUAPANYIN KOJO ATTA & 3 ORS -

pg. 9 The Respondents also called Ebusuapanyin Kwesi Bondzie (a.k.a Arkra), the overall head of the Royal Twidan family of Arkra. He testified that since 1983 when he was appointed as secretary of the said family and made a principal member, it has always been the Respondents who have controlled and alienated their Immuna lands. The Appellants have never alienated lands, and the Royal Twidan family of Arkra has never shared boundary with the Appellants.

Ebusuapanyin Kobina Akyrekyer, head of the Royal Aboradze family of Ekumfi Srafa Mpoano, vested with power to enstool/destool a chief also testified on behalf of the Respondents. He produced Exhibit 4 in this regard. He testified that Srafa lands shares boundary with the Respondents’ Immuna lands and that the Appellants do not have lands at Immuna. According to his testimony, Immuna lands belong to the Kwesi Ketu Twidan family.

His testimony was followed by that of Stephen K. Odoom, a principal member of the Nsona Royal family of Owofa. He also testified that since time immemorial, his family has always shared boundary with the respondents until presently.

Next was Habiba Seidu Abokoma, a resident of Ekumfi Immuna’s testimony. She testified that in 2015, they purchased two plots of land from the second Respondent (Tufuhen Kwesi Ketu), owners of Immuna lands to build their matrimonial home. The receipt evidencing the payment made to Tufuhen Kwesi Ketu, head of family and principal members of family, was produced as Exhibit

5. She took possession of the lands and constructed an 8-bedroom foundation on one of the plots. Sometime in 2022, she was summoned by one K. Baah to the original first Appellant’s palace. At the meeting, she met the said K. Baah and the head of the Appellant’s royal family called Ebusuapanyin J.J. K. Baah, who informed her that he was interested in purchasing her land to construct a factory. Upon consultation with her husband, they decided that they would not sell the land. She visited her site the following day to see K. Baah and Ebusuapanyin J.J. NANA ABAAHOM III @ ALHAJI OBI & ANOR V. EBUSUAPANYIN KOJO ATTA & 3 ORS -

pg. 10 and others with a bulldozer, which had totally destroyed her foundation. According to K. Baah, he was acting under the instructions of Nana Odwiren. That the said Nana Odwiren openly said his Odumna family wanted her land to construct a factory. She reported the matter to the Ekumfi Otuam Police Station. Nana Odwiren, K. Baah and Ebusuapanyin J.J. honoured the Police summons and confessed to the police that they were responsible for the damage to her property. While the investigations were ongoing, his grantor, Tufuhen Kwesi Ketu (second Respondent), called her for a meeting because some NPP executives together with Ebusuapanyin J.J. had prevailed on her grantor to plead with her on their behalf to withdraw the matter from the police and promised to purchase another land from Tufuhen Kwesi Ketu (second Respondent) to replace hers and pay every cost she had incurred. She agreed after her initial hesitation. Nana Odwiren III, K. Baah and Ebusuapanyin J.J. therefore purchased another plot of land from Tufuhen Kwesi Ketu (second Respondent) for her, produced as Exhibit 6, hired a bulldozer to clear and prepare the land and paid an amount of GHC8000 for the destruction to her foundation.