On April 4, 2024, Her Worship, Beatrice Boatemaa Damoah ESQ., presiding over the District Magistrate Court of Bibiani reaffirmed Nana Ngoa Anyimah Kodom II, Chief of Bibiani and also Kontihene of Sefwi Anhwiaso Traditional Area as the rightful grantor (Land owner) of all lands in Bibiani with suit no. A11/12/2022 between Joseph Obiri Yeboah – [plaintiff] versus 1] Asamoah 2] – Afoko [defendants].
The Chief of Bibiani who is also the Grantor (Land owner) of the second defendant Afoko, testified in this suit as the second defendant’s first witness [DW1]. Who exhibited his gazette notifications, previous judgement from the same court and Appealed from the High Court of Sekondi?
In the said judgement the Presiding Magistrate Her Worship, Beatrice Boatemaa Damoah ESQ., relied on previous judgement with suit No. A1/143/15 between Madam Grace Asamoa,[plaintiff] versus Church of Pentecost [PIWC-BIBIANI, DEFENDANT] delivered by the same District Magistrate Court of Bibiani held on Monday the 14th Day of September 2015 before His Worship Felix Datsomor ESQ, where Nana Ngoa Anyimah Kodom II the Chief of Bibiani and Grantor of the plaintiff testified as plaintiff’s first witness [PW1].
Also, in that same suit between Grace Asamoah versus Church of Pentecost, [PIWC- Bibiani], Nana Kyem Kofi, the Chief of Patabouso and also the Abusuapanyin of Omanhene of Sefwi-Anhwiaso Traditional Area who claimed to be the grantor of the defendant also testified as the defendant’s second witness [DW2].
In the judgement between Grace Asamoah versus Church of Pentecost, the presiding Magistrate, His Worship Felix Datsomor ESQ., said that Patabuoso chief has no land in Bibiani and cannot alienate same to anybody in Bibiani. He emphatically stated on page 14 paragraph 4 that ‘‘I wish to make few remarks in this judgement relating to the conduct of DW2, in signing and/or endorsing the alleged documents covering the disputed plot for DW1, after allegedly acquiring same from the late Kontihene of Bibiani when he knew at the time of signing same that he was not the one who allocated same to DW1 and so could not have been vested with any capacity whatsoever to sign those documents in the first place. What has the Chief of Patabuoso got to with a plot of land situate at Bibiani?. This conduct is not just criminally fraudulent as I have stated of earlier on this judgement per section 34 of Act 122 but also has the propensity of causing unwarranted litigations between innocent purchasers of land within the jurisdiction of this court like in the instant case. I would therefore sound a word of caution to all manner of persons who have, are and/or intend to engage in any such fraudulent land transactions to desist from same since they will not be spared by the laws of the land if they have a brush with same. What even appears quite surprising to this court is the fact that DW2 maintained in cross examination that he has capacity to allocate a plot of land in Bibiani because the Kontihene [presumably the Chief of Bibiani] is only a caretaker for the Patabuoso stool. I wish to make the point clear that that assertion is not a valid defense in law and so DW2 is to note same and erase such a notion from his mind since he can be in trouble one day if he eventually effectuates his said mindset by transferring and/or alienating any land situate on the Bibiani stool lands. A word to the wise, they say, is enough”.
It is important to note that, His Worship Felix Dastomor ESQ.,in concluding his judgement, placed perpetual injunction on the Defendant on page 15, paragraph 3, of the judgement that, “I further restrained the Defendant, whether by itself, it’s agents, privies, assigns, entities and all person (s) who claim title to the said building plot”.
The above perpetual injunction ordered by the Honorable Court explains that the grantor of the Defendant who was Nana Kyem Kofi, the Chief of Patabouso and Abusuapanyin of Omanhene of Anhwiaso Traditional area is also restrained by the Court.
The presiding Magistrate, His Worship Felix Datsomor ESQ, ruled in the judgement in favour of the Plaintiff- Madam Grace Asamoah against the Defendant-Church of Pentecost [PIWC-BIBIANI] and defendant disagreeing with the decision of the District Magistrate court of Bibiani went on Appeal at High Court in Sekondi with suit No. E12/18/16 entitled GRACE ASAMOAH, PLAINTIFF/RESPONDENT VRS CHURCH OF PENTECOST, and DEFENDANT/APPELLANT.
On the 12th Day of April 2017, at the Appellate Court, Presided over by Her Ladyship Hannah Taylor [MRS]. J. High Court Judge of Sekondi in the Western Region, affirmed the judgement of the District Magistrate Court of Bibiani presided over by His Worship Felix Datsomor ESQ. on 14th September 2015. Her Ladyship Hannah Taylor [MRS] J. specifically ruled on page 17 paragraph 5 in the following words, “The trial judge in this case found acceptable the evidence led by respondent establishing her root of title to the Bibiani stool is the land in dispute lies at Bibiani for that matter held that grantor of the appellant has nothing to give in respect of lands at Bibiani. Thus, failure to appoint a surveyor in the circumstances does not merit the setting aside of the court’s decision as the court found out that, the Patabuoso stool has no land in Bibiani to alienate”. Her Ladyship Hannah Taylor [MRS] J. High court judge also ruled against the Church of Pentecost in their Appeal.
From the above judgement shown the Presiding Magistrate of District Court Bibiani in delivering the judgement with suit No. A11/12/22 between Joseph Obiri Yeboah versus Asamoah and Afoko, affirmed the capacity of Nana Ngoa Anyimah Kodom II, the Chief of Bibiani, who is the Kontihene of Sefwi Anhwiaso Traditional Area as the Grantor (Land Owner) of Aduana Stool lands in Bibiani. Her Worship, the presiding Magistrate of Bibiani District court, Beatrice Boatemaa Damoah ESQ. did not mince words to state that”, The district court is bound by the decisions of the superior court of judicature like the high court in this instance. It is therefore follows that this court is bound by the decision of the high court delivered on the 12th of April 2017, regarding the issue of the right of 2nd defendant’s wetness herein to alienate lands in Bibiani”.
