Koforidua High Court restrains Berekuso chief
A Koforidua High Court, presided over by Justice James B. Benson, has restrained the Chief of Berekuso, Nana Oteng Korankye II and others from granting lands in the Onyankese-ase area near Berekuso in the Eastern Region until the final determination of a suit currently pending before it.
Advertisement
This follows an application for interlocutory injunction brought against the chief and others by the head of the Onyankese-ase clan of Berekuso, Nana Tiite Poku IV.
Affidavit
In his affidavit, Nana Poku IV stated that large portions of his family land were currently in danger of being lost to the family following indiscriminate sale of those lands to third parties by the Chief of Berekuso.
In a defence filed by the chief, he denied the allegation and further stated that by virtue of the fact that he was the Chief of Berekuso, he was the automatic head of his family.
As a result, he had every right to grant the said lands to prospective buyers.
Arguing for the motion, counsel for the plaintiffs/applicants, Kwadwo Addeah-Safo, said that the applicants had legal and equitable right which ought to be protected by the court.
He further argued that it was just and convenient for the court to grant the injunction, since on the balance of convenience, the applicants would suffer greater hardship if the application was refused.
Opposition to the application
Opposing the application, counsel for the defendants/respondents, K. Amoako Adjei, prayed the court to refuse the application since Nana Oteng Korankye II and the other defendants would suffer the most if the application was granted.
Court ruling
In its ruling, the high court held that since the main issue to be determined between the parties was who was the head of family and who had the right to alienate or grant the Onyankese-ase family lands, it was just and convenient to restrain Nana Oteng Korankye II, his privies, assigns, agents and whoever from having anything to do with the land by way of alienation and grant of same until the final determination of the suit.
The court added that in order not for the applicant to grant the same lands during the pendency of the suit, he was also restrained.