DUUT NIXON v. HABIB OSMANU
June 24, 2022
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
- V. D. OFOE, JA (PRESIDING)
- J. BARTELS-KODWO (MRS.), JA
- S. R. BERNASKO ESSAH (MRS.), JA
Areas of Law
- Property and Real Estate Law
- Equity and Trusts
- Civil Procedure
- Evidence Law
June 24, 2022
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
This appeal from the High Court in Tamale concerns a boundary dispute within the Nyanshegu Extension Block B Residential Area. The plaintiff, who acquired plots 29 and 30 in 1999 and later gave plot 29 to Jacob Laar, returned in 2018 to find the defendant occupying a completed house. The defendant claimed his structure was on plot 31, purchased in 2013 from Issahaku Hardi (who had obtained the land from Doris Edi) and said a surveyor confirmed plot 31 pre-purchase. The trial judge held the building sits on plot 30 but denied the plaintiff possession on equitable acquiescence, ordering an exchange: plaintiff to assign plot 30 to the defendant, and defendant to assign plot 31 to the plaintiff. The Court of Appeal (per V. D. Ofoe, JA) affirmed, deeming the surveyor’s report unnecessary, upholding use of acquiescence despite it not being pleaded, deferring to trial findings, and dismissing the appeal.
V. D. OFOE
It is the case of the plaintiff/appellant that plot No. 30 on which the defendant has erected his house is his. The defendant on his part contended that his building is on plot No. 31 and not 30. It became necessary for the trial judge to determine whether the plot on which the defendant/respondent has his completed building and is in habitation for about 3 years before the plaintiff confronted him claiming ownership, is indeed plot No 30 being claimed by the plaintiff. It is worth noting that this plot No 30 is amongst several other numbered plots within the area described by the parties as Nyanshegu Residential area. We have plots numbered linearly from 25 to 32 and six other numbered rows.
It is the case of the plaintiff that he got the lease of this plot No 30 together with its adjoining plot No 29 in the year 1999. He subsequently gave out plot No 29 to a Jacob Laar. Since 2012 he was not able to visit this plot because he was taken out of Tamale on transfer but when he did visit in 2018 he noticed the defendant had a completed building on the plot. All efforts he made for the defendant to accept that he had built on his plot No 30 and not 31 met with no success because the defendant was not ready to cooperate. He had no option than sue him for reliefs as endorsed on his writ of summons, to wit:
“a. A declaration of title to the said plot No 30 Nyanshegu Extension Block B Area
b. Recovery of possession to the said plot of land described in relief (a) above
c. Damages for trespass by the defendant unto the said plot of land.
d. An order of perpetual injunction restraining the defendant either by himself, his agents, servants, workers or persons whatsoever on the defendant’s behalf or instructions from entering into or otherwise dealing with the said land inconsistent with the rights or interest of the plaintiff
e. An order of mandatory injunction ordering the defendant with whatever materials or substance they have deposited on the land to remove and carry the same away from the said piece of land and to fill all trenches and holes dug by the defendant on the said piece of land”.
The defendant on his part claimed to have bought plot No 31 with an uncompleted building on it since 2013 from Issahaku Hardi who got the land from Doris Edi. Before purchase he got a surveyor who confirmed to him that the plot he was buying was plot No. 31. He has been in effective possession with his completed building 3 years before the plaintiff confront