Saved in:
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Recurso digital |
| Language: | |
| Published: |
Zenodo
2025
|
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.16255726 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
Table of Contents:
- <p>This appeal should have been met with positive result and never ought to have ended totally in failure in this court. From the reports the court discovered that Ayanfuri Stool and Gyaman Stool had personal interest in the land in dispute. Gyaman Stool held the pocessory title and Ayanfuri Stool held the allodial title. If that was the case, it would be wrong for the court below to proclaim the plaintiffs the owners of the land. This fact must have been raised as the bedrock of this appeal but it was not. However, the High Court Judge considered the two million cost awarded against appellants as expensive. This amount was awarded two years ago by small court, Dunkwa District Magistrate Court. With respect to these advantages, the appellants<br>lose their appeal when their counsel committed catastrophic error by rejecting all the justification for appeal<br>in favor of only one which ended in a failure</p>