EMMANUEL OFORI VS ACADEMIC CITY COLLEGE
2019
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
- HIS LORDSHIP, JUSTICE NICHOLAS M. C. ABODAKPI (J)
Areas of Law
- Civil Procedure
- Property and Real Estate Law
2019
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
Justice Nicholas M. C. Abodakpi of the High Court granted an interlocutory injunction restraining a college from further interference with adjoining land and a construction project. After the writ and motion were served on 25 July 2019, the college’s counsel, Kwame Fosu Gyeabour, acknowledged the 13 August hearing but filed no processes and did not attend. The plaintiff claimed he acquired the plot from the Odai Ntow family, took possession, lodged documents at the Lands Commission, built a wall, and erected a house to lintel level; he alleged the college demolished the wall and the house under construction. The court examined Exhibit A (a leasehold dated 03/05/2018 with a site plan) and Exhibit B (photographs of debris), found the interference deliberate, and applied Order 25’s criteria. It held that, despite the lease being unregistered, the plaintiff has an equitable interest requiring protection, and ordered an undertaking under Order 25 Rule 9(1). The motion was granted.
1. On 25th July, 2019, the writ of summons was duly served on Defendant/College (simply referred to as Respondent). The affidavit of service is on the docket.
The motion for an order of interlocutory injunction was filed on the same day as the writ.
A letter dated 12/08/2019 from Kwame Fosu Gyeabour, showed that Respondent has been served, and are fully aware that the motion has been fixed on 13/08/2019 for hearing.
However, Respondent has neglected to file any response whatsoever.
In the correspondence referred to supra, Counsel for Respondent is seeking adjournment of the case to 26/08/2019. The letter has been addressed to the Registrar of this Court only.
On the 13/08/2019, when the case was called neither Respondent nor any representative was in Court.
In effect on 13/08/2019, a Respondent, who is Defendant in this action, who has neither filed, a Notice of Appearance nor an affidavit in opposition of the injunction application, is demanding almost, two weeks or (fourteen days) adjournment without any basis in the rules of the High Court Civil Procedure Rules (C. I. 47/04). This Court proceeded to hear the motion, as provided in ORDER 36 Rule 1(2) of the High Court, Civil Procedure Rules, 2004, C. I. 47/04. It is provided therein that, where an action is called for trial and a party fails to attend, the trial judge may allow the Plaintiff (the party) present to prove his case.
The statement of claim and the affidavit evidence proffered is to the effect that, on or about 03/05/2019, Plaintiff acquired the subject matter, plot from the Odai Ntow family, represented by heads of the four gates.
Secondly, Plaintiff averred that he went into possession, having deposited the title documents at the Lands Commission for registration.
He alleged he built a wall around the land and constructed a house up to lintel level thereon.
Thirdly, he alleged, a couple of months ago, Respondent demolished his wall, separating the two properties and pulled down his house under construction as well.
In support of the grant, Plaintiff cited EXHIBIT ‘A’, which is the leasehold document dated 03/05/2018, executed in his fovour by the Allodial owners of the land.
And I have examined same, it has a site plan that identifies the land.
I have examined also EXHIBIT ‘B’, which is a photograph, showing what appears to be the debris of the wall and the house Plaintiff referred to.
2. It is ORDER 25 of C. I. 47/04 that provides for this type of application.
In Rule 1 of