ALHAJI IBRAHIM ABUBAKAR ALHERI & ANOR v. ISSAKA ABDULAI & ANOR
2019
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
- OWUSU J.A. (PRESIDING)
- DZAMEFE J.A.
- WELBOURNE J.A.
Areas of Law
- Civil Procedure
- Property and Real Estate Law
- Evidence Law
- Contract Law
2019
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
A three-judge panel of the Court of Appeal, presided over by Mariama Owusu J.A., affirmed the Circuit Court, Kumasi’s judgment recognising the 1st and 2nd plaintiffs’ legal and equitable interests in two flats (the ground and first floors) at House/Plot No. 4 Block J, Dichemso Extension, Kumasi. The circuit court voided the purported transfer of those flats to the 2nd defendant but indicated he could be entitled to the uncompleted third floor and outhouse. On appeal, the 2nd defendant challenged the decision on the weight of evidence, the timing and validity of the plaintiffs’ acquisition, his status as a bona fide purchaser, and the trial judge’s treatment of a High Court judgment. The appellate court upheld the trial court’s findings that Exhibits A–D evidenced a prior assignment to the plaintiffs and found that the 2nd defendant completed the transaction before conducting a Lands Commission search, thus lacking bona fide status and being imputed with constructive notice. Applying nemo dat and equitable notice principles, and referencing the Evidence Act and Land Registry Act, the court dismissed the appeal and affirmed the judgment.
JUDGEMENT
MARIAMA OWUSU, J.A.
On 28th March, 2017, the Circuit Court, Kumasi gave judgment for the plaintiff on his reliefs (a), (b) and (c) and dismissed 2nd defendants counterclaim on relief (a).
In her judgment, the trial court held among other things as follows:
“I hereby declare the plaintiffs have legal and equitable interest in two flats (all rooms and utilities on both the ground and 1stfloors) in residential Plot No. 4 Block J, Dichemso Extension, Kumasi are exclusively and absolutely per Exhibit ‘A’ to ‘D’.
The reliefs ‘b’ is granted only to the extent that the transaction of the said two flats to 2nd defendant were void. The relief ‘c’ is granted only in respect of two flats plaintiffs are adjudged entitled.
The 2nd defendant’s relief ‘a’ fails. However, he may be granted portion in the disputed house because there was unchallenged evidence that there is an uncompleted 3rd floor as well as an outhouse (boys’ quarters) sitting on the plot in dispute. So if 2nd defendant is on record to have paid some valuable consideration for the entire house but it turned out two flats in the house did not belong to his grantor, but the 3rd floor (uncompleted) and the outhouse/boys quarters are available and he is desirous of taking possession, I think it would be in the interest of justice to declare him entitled to the legal and equitable rights in that portion which his grantor had not alienated to anyone as at the time 1st and 2nd defendants contract was made relief ‘a’ and ‘c’ are implied in the above only to the extent of the portion 2nd defendant has been declared owner. Safe this, the 2nd defendant counterclaim fails.”
Dissatisfied with the decision of the Circuit Court, the 2nd defendant appealed to this court on the following grounds:
a. The judgment is against the weight of evidence.
b. The trial Judge erred when she held that the 1stdefendant had validly transferred his interest in both the ground and the 1stfloor in plot No. 4 Block J, Dichemso Extension, Kumasi (the disputed property) to the plaintiffs.
c. The trial Judge erred when she held that the plaintiffs/respondents were first in time to have acquired interest in both the ground and first floors in the house in dispute.
d. The trial Judge erred when she held that the 2nd defendant/appellant was not a bonafide purchaser for value without notice of the house in dispute.
e. The trial Judge erred when she held that the 2nd defendant/appellant was entitled to the 3rd floor and the ou