ANTHONY ATTA POKU VS KOJO DORBOR & ORS
June 6, 2019
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
- HIS LORDSHIP JUSTICE K. A. GYIMAH
Areas of Law
- Property and Real Estate Law
- Civil Procedure
- Evidence Law
- Tort Law
June 6, 2019
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
This High Court land dispute concerns Plot No. 626, East Legon, Accra. Anthony Atta Poku, holding a 1988 state lease and a 1988 Accra City Council building permit, sued after discovering structures erected and occupied by the defendants. The 3rd defendant traced possession to his late mother’s acquisition from Esther Amorkor Nortey and, after her death in 1995, completed the building and installed the 1st defendant as caretaker, later seeking regularization at the Lands Commission. The court confirmed the land as State property, validating only state grants, so the plaintiff’s lease was lawful while the 3rd defendant’s asserted root of title was not. Nonetheless, applying section 10 of the Limitation Act, the court found the 3rd defendant’s continuous, open occupation since 1995 established adverse possession, extinguishing the plaintiff’s title over the 0.16-acre portion built upon, granting the 3rd defendant possessory title to that portion, and declaring the plaintiff owner of the remaining land. Injunctive relief issued accordingly, with no order as to costs.
Plaintiffs’ Case By an amended writ of summons issued on 18th July 2016, the plaintiff claimed the following reliefs against the defendants: i. Declaration of title to plot No. 626, East Legon Residential Area, Accra in favour of the plaintiff herein.
Damages for trespass against each of the defendants.
Recovery of possession of plot No. 626 aforesaid from the defendants to the plaintiff.
Demolition of all structures on the land by the defendants at the cost of the defendants.
v. Perpetual injunction against the defendants, their agents and servants as well as their assigns and successors.
Any other relief deemed fit by this honourable court.
It is the plaintiff’s case that in the year 1988, after an application he had made to the Lands Commission for a parcel of land was approved, the Government of Ghana through the Lands Commission granted a lease covering an approximate area of 0. 47 of an acre over the land in dispute in his favour.
He took possession of the land and placed corner pillars on all the four corners of the land.
He immediately got a plan and drawings for the construction of a single storey building on the land which plan was approved, culminating in the issuance of a building permit by the Accra City Council on 11th November 1988. The plaintiff further asserts that he put sand, stones and blocks on the land to commence his construction but he was met with some agitation from some people from the nearby village who occupied the plot thereby preventing him from commencing his construction activities.
He brought this to the attention of the Lands Commission who took quite some time before bringing the situation under control.
It is the plaintiff’s case that when he later visited the land after calm had returned, he found that the defendants had entered the land and without authority, erected two separate structures on the land which they were occupying.
He accosted them and tried to get them out of his land but he was not successful.
He caused his solicitors to write to the defendants but they defied the said letter.
The plaintiff therefore asserts that the defendants have no interest in the land in dispute; neither have they any right to be on the land but they are bent on occupying the land to the detriment of the plaintiff and it is only the court’s intervention that can halt the defendants’ trespass activities.
The plaintiff therefore claimed the reliefs endorsed on the writ of summons as captured above.
3rd defendant’s def