EXPORT AND IMPORT BANK OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA VS TATOP COMPANY LTD & ORS

The facts of the present suit are that the Plaintiff/Judgement-Creditor/Defendant herein (Judgement Creditor) sued and obtained Judgment against Tatop Company Limited, the 1st Defendant/Judgement Debtor (1st Judgement Debtor) in Suit No. BFS/143/2015. In the course of executing the said Judgement, the Judgement Creditor attached an Industrial Property known as Tatop (The Property) located at Sampaman at Weija in the Greater Accra Region and belonging to the Judgement- Debtor.

Following the attachment of the Property by the Judgement Creditor, the Claimant/Plaintiff (Claimant) who describes himself as the Dzaasetse and acting Weija Mantse, filed a Notice of Claim in respect of the Property.

The case of the Claimant is that the land on which the Property is situate belongs to the Weija Stool and not the 1st Judgement Debtor.

The said land, according to Claimant, was trespassed upon by the 1st Judgment-Debtor who proceeded to construct an Industrial factory on the disputed land.

Upon realizing the unlawful presence of the Judgment-Debtor on the land, Claimant says he commenced a suit in the Land Division of this Court in Suit Number LD/0785/2018 for declaration of title to the said piece of land among other reliefs.

In support of his assertions, Claimant tendered evidence of Suit LD/0785/2018 as Exhibit A. According to Claimant, the said suit is currently pending before the Land Division of this Court and is yet to be determined.

Also tendered was Exhibit B, a search which is said to disclose that the land in question belongs to the Weija Stool.

Exhibits C and D were also tendered to prove that following litigation with the Sempe Stool over the land in dispute, the Sempe stool surrendered all its claims to the said land to the Weija Stool in 1996 as a result of an out of Court settlement between the said Parties.

Claimant contends that the failure of the 1st Judgment-Debtor to contest Suits Numbered LD/ 0785/2018 and BFS /143/2015 is ample proof of the 1st Judgement Debtor’s knowledge of the defect in its title to the Property.

He maintains that the 1st Judgement-Debtor unlike Claimant stands to lose nothing if the sale embarked upon by the Judgment Creditor is allowed to proceed as the Property does not belong to the 1st Judgment- Debtor.

The Judgment-Creditor resists the Claimant’s claim.

Testifying through the Clerk of its Counsel, Thywill Dotse, the Judgement/Creditor tendered Exhibits 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 in proof of due process followed which cul