2013
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
This case revolves around a land ownership dispute between a church (appellant) and an individual (respondent). Initially, the appellant claimed to have leased the land from the respondent and later made payments towards its purchase. The trial court ruled in favor of the respondent, asserting that the land was family property and the payments were for rent. The appellant appealed, arguing errors in the trial judge’s findings and discretion. The appellate court found the trial court's findings were against the weight of evidence and that the respondent was bound by documents he signed. The appeal was allowed, and the trial court's decision was set aside.
MARIAMA OWUSU, J.A:
Two main issues crop up for determination in this appeal. They are as follows;
1. Whether the disputed property is family property.
2. Whether or not the transaction entered into by the parties in 2007 is an outright sale of the disputed property or a rent agreement for ten (10) years.
The trial judge answered the first issue in the affirmative. On the second issue, he came to the conclusion that the transaction was a rent agreement.
Dissatisfied with the decision of the trial court, the plaintiff/appellant mounted the instant appeal on the following grounds:
i. The judge erred in holding that the land the subject matter of the instant dispute, belonged to Defendant’s family.
ii. The judgment was against the weight of evidence.
iii. The trial judge wrongly exercised his discretion when against the weight of evidence, he refused plaintiff’s claim.
iv. Further grounds to be filed on receipt of the Record of Appeal.
The relief sought from the Court Appeal:
That the Judgment of the High Court, Koforidua dated the 1st day of February 2012 be reversed and plaintiff’s claim granted.
At this stage let me put it on record that the plaintiff/appellant did not file additional grounds of appeal as indicated in its Notice of Appeal.
Also in this appeal, the plaintiff/appellant would be referred to simply as appellant and the defendant/respondent as respondent.
Before dealing with the arguments canvassed in support of this appeal, I will give a brief background to this case.
The appellant through its registered Trustees by its writ of summons claims against the respondent Specific Performance by executing an indenture transferring ownership to appellant of its duly acquired parcel of land described in its writ of summons and cost.
In its statement of claim the appellant averred that in 1993, it entered into a tenancy agreement with the defendant in respect of the disputed land for ten years. The appellant further averred that after the expiration of the agreement, it remained on the land and paid monthly rent until 2006 when it offered to buy the land. It continued that the respondent initially refused to sell the land, but later agreed in 2007, upon which it made payments by installment between March and May 2008. It is the case of the appellant that, in pursuant of this agreement it has built a church on the land. The appellant concluded that, all attempts to get the respondent to convey the land to it had proved futile hence this