December 12, 2022
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
On appeal from the District Court at Winneba, members of the Supi Kwaama Twidan family, led by the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd Plaintiffs, challenged a judgment that favored the Defendants regarding House No. JO16/12 (formerly 295/12) on Victoria Road, Winneba. The Appellants asserted that their maternal grandfather, Opanyin Kwaku Bainyi, owned the property and that they retained documents and paid property rates; they also pursued ejectment through Rent Control and CHRAJ after permitting Kow Amoquandoh to occupy a vacant room and he invited the 2nd Defendant. The Respondents denied these claims, maintaining the house belonged to Opanyin Kojo Afer and successor Kojo Mensah, and that the Plaintiffs were tenants. After reviewing the evidence and applying the Evidence Act, customary family law, and appellate standards, the High Court found the Plaintiffs proof unreliable, upheld the District Courts judgment, declared the property for the Defendants Twidan family, authorized recovery of possession, dismissed the appeal, and awarded GH20,000 costs.
JUDGMENT
The Plaintiffs/Appellants on the 25th day of August, 2021 filed a Notice of Appeal
against the Judgment of the District Court, Winneba, in the Central Region delivered on
the 19th day of June 2021 in favour of the Defendants/Respondents against the
Plaintiffs/Appellants.
For ease of reference the Plaintiffs/Appellants will also be referred to, as the Appellants
whilst the Defendants/Respondents will also be referred to, as the Respondents.
The Appellants’ action against the Respondents at the court below and per the Writ,
was for the following reliefs:
(1) An order of the court for recovery of Possession and restraining the
Defendants/Squatters from interfering with the Property of the Plaintiffs Plot 295,
Victoria Road.
(2) Order of the court for ejection of the Defendants /squatters from the premises
(3) Cost against Defendants/Squatters.
The Defendants on the other hand denied the Plaintiffs claim in their Statement of
Defence and counter – claimed thus:
(a) Defendants of title to the subject-matter property.
(b) Recovery of possession.
THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE
It is the case of the Plaintiffs that the property in dispute was previously numbered as
House No. 295/12 but now re-numbered House No. JO16/12 Victoria Road, Winneba,
belonged to their grandfather Opanyin Kwaku Bainyi which was given to their
grandmother before the death of their grandfather. Thereafter, the Plaintiffs averred
that, their grandmother in turn handed over the property to her children with the 2nd
Plaintiff being the eldest. The Plaintiffs also stated that the 3rd Plaintiff has been their
Head of Family for the past ten years. Plaintiffs further said they are in possession of the
document covering the land in dispute and that the 1st and 2nd Plaintiffs have been
paying the property rates in respect of the property.
According to the Plaintiffs, it was the mother of one Kow Amoquandoh who came to
plead for him to be given a place to stay because he had then been ejected from home,
as a result of which she gave him one of the vacant room to stay. The Plaintiffs further
contended that, the 2nd Plaintiff travelled to Takoradi and upon her return, she realized
that the said Kow Amoquandoh had brought in the 2nd Defendant to live with him. The
Plaintiffs stated that when the 2nd Plaintiff enquired about the presence of the 2
nd
Defendant in the house, the said Kow Amoquandoh informed her that they were
making arrangements to relocate but hav