DAVID ODAMTTEN ABBEY VS SHANTY ANNAN

At the Application for Directions stage the parties joined issues as follows:

1. Whether or not the land in dispute and the building thereon belonged to the Defendant’s grandfather P. J. G. Wilkinson;

2. Whether or not the Defendant was at all material times in possession of the land in dispute.

3. Whether or not Plaintiff has been in occupation of the land since 2015. 4. Whether or not the Plaintiff took the necessary steps to ascertain the true ownership of the land in dispute at the Lands Commission before attempting to enter unto the land; 5. Whether or not the Plaintiff is entitled to the reliefs claimed in his Statement of Claim.

In support of his Claim the Plaintiff pleaded that he is also known as Nii Quao Donkor II, a Traditional Chief and an Auctioneer by profession.

According to the Plaintiff he got to know the Defendant when she caused the arrest of his workers over the disputed land.

It is the case of the Plaintiff that the land together with a dilapidated building thereon belongs to the Sempe Stool and that the Stool has Judgment in respect of Lartebiokoshie lands.

Plaintiff states that sometime in 2015, the Stool leased the disputed property to him for which a document evidencing the lease was executed between the Sempe Chief, Nii Adote Otintor II and him.

The Plaintiff was thereafter granted possession and he placed his family members as caretakers on the premises.

Sometime in 2020, the Plaintiff in wanting to renovate the property sent his workers to the land only to be arrested by the Police due to a complaint lodged by the Defendant.

The Plaintiff says that the defunct U. T. C. occupied the plot till they vacated the place and handed over same to the Sempe Stool.

The Plaintiff says that the Defendant has not shown any evidence of ownership as a search conducted on the property showed that the Sempe Stool is the owner of the property in dispute.

The Plaintiff sates that the Defendant is a trespasser on the land and will not stop her trespassory activities until otherwise ordered by the Court.

Based on these facts Plaintiff Claims against the Defendant as follows: a. Declaration of land title to the land as described in the schedule.

b. Recovery of Possession.

c. Perpetual Injunction restraining the Defendant, her Agent(s) or any person(s)claiming through her from entering or causing anything to be brought onto the land or building on the land in dispute pending the final determination of the Suit.

d. General Damages for