AKUA AFRIYIE VS NII AKWEI SAKA & ANOR
2016
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
- JENNIFER DODOO (MRS)
Areas of Law
- Evidence Law
2016
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
The claimants sought to establish ownership of a building seized by the Execution Creditor. Nii Aboagye represented the family, providing evidence including utility bills. The Plaintiff, who disputed the claim, argued that the claimant lacked the authority to represent the family. The court examined the ownership and authority issues, ultimately finding the claimant successful in casting doubt on the Plaintiff's assertion of ownership. The property was ordered to be released from attachment, and costs were awarded against the Plaintiff.
The Claimants in this suit have claimed ownership of a building which the Execution Creditor had seized in execution of a prior judgment.
Nii Aboagye who described himself as the 2nd Claimant deposed to a supplementary affidavit thus:
1. I am the 2nd Claimant and deponent herein.
2. That I am a grandchild of the late Ataa Aye Otuafo and a member of the Otuafo family and have the authority of the other Claimants to depose to this affidavit, the facts of which have come to my knowledge as a member of the said family.
3. That the family has agreed that I act to protect the property in question instead of the head of family who has been hindered in the performance of his duties by his health.
4. That at the hearing of this application, Counsel for the Claimants shall seek leave of this Honourable Court to refer to all processes or issues filed so far in this suit.
5. That the property (H. No. E/389/16) which has been attached is a family property and in accordance with customs and traditions, the property cannot be claimed by a descendant of our late grandfather Ataa Ayeh Otuafo 6. That the late Ataa Ayeh Otuafo was a subject of the Osu Stool and was validly granted a parcel of land in Maamobi where he constructed the current property which he used as his home.
Attached are Water Bill and Electricity Bill in his name.
7. That I am verily advised and believe same to be true that if there is any interest any of the judgment debtors have in the said property, it may only be the right to be accommodated and not to alienate the property as it is contrary to law, custom and tradition.
The Plaintiff disputed the claim. . The court proceeded to take evidence from the 2 rival contenders to determine the true ownership of the property in question.
The 2nd Claimant in his witness statement repeated his averments made in his affidavit of interest. He also told the court that the attached property was House No. E389/16 situate and lying at Maamobi.
It was his testimony that the house in question belonged to his deceased grandfather.
On his grandfather’s demise, the house had been used as a family house.
He said the 2nd Defendant whom judgment had been entered against lived also in the said house but denied that the house belonged to the said uncle.
This is what transpired in cross-examination: Q: Is Nii Kojo Otuafo, the 2nd Defendant in the original case your father? A: No. My Lord.
Q: Who is he to you? A: He is my uncle, the youngest of my uncles.
Q: