Brinsley K. Quartey v. Rev. Samuel Yompah & Anor
2016
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
- M.OWUSU, (J.A.) - Presiding
- KORBIEH, (J.A.)
- WELBOURNE, (J.A.)
Areas of Law
- Property and Real Estate Law
- Civil Procedure
- Evidence Law
2016
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
The High Court of Accra ruled in favor of the plaintiff, declaring his title to the disputed land and awarding damages, while dismissing the defendants' counterclaim for lack of valid title. The defendants appealed on various grounds, including claims of res judicata, improper evaluation of evidence, and fraud. The Court of Appeal found that the High Court had correctly applied the law and facts, and upheld its decision, dismissing the appeal on all grounds.
MARIAMA OWUSU, J.A.: On the 28th of May 2014, the High Court, Accra gave judgment for the plaintiff against defendants.
The defendants’ counterclaim was dismissed.
In her judgment, the trial judge held among other things as follows: “The grantors of the defendant therefore not having any interest whatsoever in the land in dispute at the time they purported to have granted the land to the defendants, same could not have been transferred to the defendants.
The defendants therefore have no valid title to the land in dispute and they could not have sustained any counterclaim in this suit, and same is hereby dismissed.
Judgment is hereby entered in favour of the plaintiff as follows; 1. A declaration of title to all that piece of land described in the schedule to the statement of claim hereto hereby made in favour of the plaintiff.
2. Plaintiff is to recover possession of all that piece of land described in the schedule to the statement of claim hereto.
3. The defendants, their agents, privies and all that takes authority from them are hereby restrained from interfering with plaintiff’s enjoyment of the land.
4. The defendants are to demolish any structure on the land within 30 working days.
5. Gh¢5,000.00 damages inclusive of cost is hereby awarded against the defendants.
6. The title certificate of the defendant with No.
GA 20739 of 2nd day of December, 2004 is also hereby cancelled.” Dissatisfied with the decision of the High Court, the defendant appealed to the Court of Appeal on the following grounds: “1. The judgment is against the weight of evidence.
2. The court erred when it ruled that “Res judicata” did not apply in this case.
3. The court erred when it failed to take full cognizance of the Exhibit from Land Title Registry.
4. The court erred in law when it accepted the evidence of the plaintiff on his title to the disputed land without proof as laid down by law.
5. The court erred in law when it failed to consider the competing roots of title of the parties.
6. The court accordingly erred in law when it ruled that the land title certificate of the 2nd defendant was procured either by fraud or mistake and should be cancelled.
7. The court erred in law when it depended on limitation when limitation was neither pleaded nor canvassed by the plaintiff.” The reliefs sought from the Appeal Court are: “a. The judgment of the trial court to be set aside b. Judgment to be entered in favour of the defendant.” Before dealing with the a