EDWIN OKRAH & ANOR VS RICHARD NIKOI AND THE OCCUPIERS
2015
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
- HER LADYSHIP BARBARA TETTEH-CHARWAY (J)
Areas of Law
- Civil Procedure
- Property and Real Estate Law
- Evidence Law
2015
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
Plaintiffs initiated legal proceedings to claim ownership and possession of a plot in East Legon, Accra, against defendants who did not respond to the suit. Throughout the trial, plaintiffs presented comprehensive evidence, including historical acquisition documents and administrative proofs, to establish their claim. The defendants' lack of participation and cross-examination led the court to admit the plaintiffs' evidence uncontested. The court ruled in favor of the plaintiffs, recognizing their title to the land but denied them damages for trespass given the defendants' occupancy status as licensees.
Plaintiffs, Edwin Okrah and Victoria Okrah, issued a writ of summons and statement of claim out of this court for a declaration of title to and recovery of possession of plot number 48 situated at East Legon Residential Area in Accra. The dimensions of the land in dispute were described in detail in the schedule reproduced in the statement of claim. The defendants to the suit were Richard Nikoi and unnamed occupiers of the land in dispute.
Neither the 1st defendant nor the persons described as occupiers entered appearance to the suit, although there was proof that the 1st defendant was served with the writ of summons and statement of claim by substituted service. Plaintiffs therefore applied for and obtained judgment in default of appearance against the 1st defendant. Defendants were subsequently served with court notes and hearing notice. There is no indication, however, that defendants were served with an entry of interlocutory judgment.
I do not think that this omission was fatal, as the importance of this procedure is that defendants are notified of the hearing date, which was accomplished by service of the hearing notice. In the case of Agyei Osae & Others v Adjeifio & Others (2007-2008) SCGLR 499, it was held that to succeed in an action for declaration of title, recovery of possession, and an injunction, the plaintiff must establish by positive evidence the identity of his land which is the subject matter of the action; else, his action shall fail for lack of certainty.
The burden of proof in land cases is proof on a balance of probabilities, as stipulated in the case of Adwubeng v Domfeh (1996-97) SCGLR 660, 670. On the date scheduled for hearing, the 1st plaintiff testified on behalf of the two plaintiffs and led evidence in proof of their title to the land in dispute. He stated that his deceased father acquired the land in dispute from the Government of Ghana by a lease dated 3rd June 1977. He tendered a certified true copy of the lease in evidence as Exhibit A. A careful examination of Exhibit A showed that it was a lease dated 3rd June 1977 between the Government of Ghana acting by the Chairman of the Lands Commission and Captain James Collins Okrah, Ministry of Defence, Burma Camp.
In the said lease, the Government had demised a piece of land known as Plot No. 48 containing an approximate area of 0.35 acres situate in East Legon Residential Area to the lessee for a period of 99 years. He further testified that he and the second plaintiff a