June 29, 2022
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
The Ghana Court of Appeal, per Justice Samuel K. A. Asiedu, allowed an appeal by the defendants against a High Court order granting an interlocutory injunction over House Number K 36, Asawasi, Kumasi. The plaintiffs had styled their suit as brought “for themselves and on behalf of all the surviving beneficiaries of the estate of John Ward Appiah,” yet pleaded in their statement of claim that they sued for descendants of Nana Ama Kra and simultaneously claimed the property is Ekuona Royal family property. The court held these inconsistent endorsements and failure to comply with Order 2 rule 4(1)(a) and Order 4 rule 9 of CI 47, including service on the head of family, rendered capacity doubtful. It further held that, because the property was said to belong to a deceased, locus stands with personal representatives under Act 63, which the plaintiffs had not shown. Without a clear legal or equitable right, the trial judge’s grant of an injunction was a misdirected exercise of discretion. The injunction was set aside and the case remitted to a differently constituted High Court.
ASIEDU, JA.
The instant appeal is against an interlocutory order of injunction made by the High Court, Kumasi on the 14th day of January 2021 against the Defendants/Appellants herein (who will hereafter be referred to as the Defendants) in favour of the Plaintiffs/Respondents (hereinafter referred to as the Plaintiffs). On the 2nd day of November 2020, “suing for themselves and on behalf of all the surviving beneficiaries of the estate of John Ward Appiah”, the Plaintiffs issued a writ of summons against the Defendants jointly and severally for:
An order of this Honourable Court declaring that House Number K 36, Asawasi Kumasi is the property of the Ekuona family of Kontoponiafari.
A further order that the 1st Defendant has no capacity to alienate/sell a portion of House Number K 36 Asawasi Kumasi.
An order for the recovery of possession of the portion of House Number K 36 Asawasi being occupied by the Defendants.
Perpetual injunction restraining the Defendants herein, their assigns, workmen, agents etc. or anybody claiming title through them or for them from further having anything to do with the land in dispute.
An order cancelling any document purporting to transfer a part of House Number K 36 Asawasi to the 2nd Defendant.
The writ was accompanied by a statement of claim. Soon after filing the writ of summons, the Plaintiffs filed a motion on notice for an order of interlocutory injunction restraining the Defendants herein, their assigns, workmen, agents etc. or anybody claiming title through them or for them from further developing or having anything to do with the land in dispute until the final determination of the suit. The motion paper was also accompanied by an affidavit in support and a statement of case. The Defendants entered a conditional appearance after the service of the writ and later filed an affidavit in opposition to the motion and a statement of case. A statement of defence was also filed by the Defendants on the 9th day of November 2020. After the hearing of the motion, the High Court delivered a ruling on the 14th January 2021, in which the court restrained the Defendants as sought by the Plaintiffs herein. It is against the ruling of the High Court, that the instant Notice of Appeal was filed by the Defendants/Appellants herein praying for “an order setting aside the said ruling and a further order dismissing the application as incompetent and, in any event, unmeritorious.” The grounds for the Defendants/Appellants’ relief in