ERNEST EKLU MENSAH v. PAUL KOFI PEPRAH

AMMA A. GAISIE J.A:

This appeal is against the judgment of the High Court (Land Division) dated the 21st day of October 2016 whereby the learned trial judge entered judgment in favour of the Plaintiff/Respondent.

It is the Plaintiff’s case that they purchased a parcel of land at Aboasa, a suburb of Accra, in the year 2006, from the allodial owners, the Nii Owoo family of Faase. The transaction was evidenced in writing by the execution of an Indenture. The Plaintiff, immediately went into occupation and constructed an 8-bedroom house on the said land. In 2011 he saw that court processes being a Writ of Summons and Statement of Claim had been posted on the wall and when he enquired from his grantors, they admitted leasing a portion of the family’s land in the same area to the Defendant but explained that the land leased to Gerald Peprah the Defendant’s son was different. The grantors promised to deal with the matter and informed Plaintiff that they had entered appearance on his behalf. Then on 28th November 2013, his 8-bedroom house was pulled down by bailiffs from the High Court and some policemen pursuant to a Writ of Possession issued from the High Court. The Plaintiff therefore issued a Writ of Summons against the Defendant/Appellant claiming the following reliefs:

“(a)Declaration of Title to all that piece and parcel of land described

in paragraph 5 of the Statement of Claim.

(b) Declaration that the Writ of Possession effected by Defendant (then Plaintiff) was executed on land other than that for which he obtained judgment in Suit No. FAL/153/12.

(c) Declaration that the demolishing of Plaintiff’s eight bedroom house by Defendant, purportedly in satisfaction of the judgement in Suit No. FAL/153/12 was wrongful and unlawful.

(d) Recovery of Possession.

(e) Damages for Trespass.

(i) Special Damages being:

(a) Total cost of the Demolished House

(b) Cost of procuring alternate accommodation to date of judgement.

(ii) General Damages

(iii) Perpetual injunction against Defendant, his servants, agents from interfering with possession and use by Plaintiff of his said land”.

Defendant denied Plaintiff’s claims and stated that Plaintiff had no cause of action against him and he was being sued in a wrong capacity as he was not the one who demolished Plaintiff’s house.

He claimed that his son Gerald Peprah lawfully acquired the land in dispute and went into possession by erecting corner pillars on the land, appointed an agent to watch over the land