AKOSUA DUFIE VRS.pdf - Judicial Training Institute

some cases of days of the week that he cannot be debited with faulty
recollection. How then was he visiting a non-existent house in 1955? It stands to
reason that since as per exhibits 2 and 4, not until as late as 9 th May 1958 the
late Kwaku Poku was still battling for a development permit he could not have
commenced let alone completed he said building much earlier.
Furthermore the documents tendered in evidence tend strongly to show that the
plot on which the disputed house stands was acquired in or around 1958. For
several receipts show that the earliest demands and payments for ground rent
date back only as far as 1958.
Also the earliest demand notices and payments in respect of property rate, then
known as general rate, are dated between 1963/64-1971/72. See pp 156-194 of
the record of appeal. Again, on the evidence, the best known time when
occupation of the house began, with tenants renting it is 1964 when PW3 rented
some rooms and connected electricity to it and thereafter the 1 st late plaintiff
herself came in there. If the house was completed in 1955 was it lying idle all
this long?
The Star Witnesses
The courts below were highly captivated by the evidence of PWS 1 and 5 in
particular. Their evidence however requires closer scrutiny.
PW 1
PW1’s evidence at p.45 between lines 31-36 is as follows: “One day I and my
husband came to Kumasi from a cottage where we were farming. When
we came the 2 nd plaintiff approached my husband and told him he had
acquired a plot at Krofofrom and so he had come to see him build a house
on the plot for him.” This evidence stands alone and is not even supported by
the plaintiff himself. The nearest support for it is when the plaintiff at p. 30 of
the record, in cross-examination and obviously as an afterthought, between
lines 31-37 said thus: “I left the allocation sheet with my elder brother because I
was leaving the country and I wanted him to use the proceeds of my shop
to develop the land for me.” He does not even indicate where this took place.
In any case from these two extracts the house was to be built not for the family
but for the plaintiff.
4