FELICES GARR & ANOR VS F. K. A. COMPANY LIMITED
2024
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
- ADJEI, J.A. (PRESIDING)
- BARTELS-KODWO J.A.
- ASARE-BOTWE, J.A.
Areas of Law
- Property and Real Estate Law
- Civil Procedure
2024
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
The case involves a dispute over land where the Plaintiff/Respondent accused the Defendants/Appellants of trespass. The court initially ruled in favor of Plaintiff/Respondent, granting Defendants/Appellants time to pay compensation. After failing to pay, Plaintiff/Respondent obtained a Writ of Possession. The Defendants/Appellants' appeals and request for Stay of Execution were dismissed. The appellate court upheld the lower court's ruling, finding the appeal lacked merit and was procedurally flawed.
BARTELS-KODWO JA:-
INTRODUCTION
This is an appeal against the ruling of the High Court granting an application for leave to issue Writ of Possession in favour of the Plaintiff/Respondent against the Defendants/Appellants. In this Judgment the parties will be referred to as the Appellant and the Respondent.
FACTS OF THE CASE
The Plaintiff/Respondent issued a Writ of summons and Statement of Claim against one Kofi Siaw deceased as 1st Defendant and Felices Garr (Pastor and founder of the Encounter Chapel as 2nd Defendant. On the death of Kofi Siaw, the 2nd Defendant was joined to the suit as trustees of the Church. The necessary amendments were then carried out to reflect the changes. By the amended writ of summons filed on 18th May, 2018, Plaintiff prayed the court for the following reliefs:
a. A declaration that the activities of the Defendants on the land in dispute amounts to trespass.
b. Damages for trespass
c. Order for the recovery of possession and further order that any offending structure placed on the said land be removed at the cost to the Defendants.
d. Perpetual injunction restraining the Defendants, their agents, assigns, and workmen from ever dealing with the land in dispute.
The Respondent then brought an application for an interim injunction to stop the 2nd Defendant/Appellant from continuing with the construction of the church building. The presiding Judge at that time refused to grant the interim injunction and ruled that since he found the matter at stake to be whether or not there was trespass at the boundary of the two adjoining lands belonging to the two parties if the fact of trespass was adjudged at the end of the trial, monetary compensation should be paid to the offending party. Consequently the 2nd Defendant/Appellant completed it’s church building which stands up to date as its place of worship.
The High Court per Her Ladyship Rebecca Sittie ‘J’ on the 16th day of May, 2019 delivered judgment in favour of the Plaintiff/Respondent for all its reliefs. Since the Appellants admitted trespass and the court found same to be the case the judgment permitted the Appellants the opportunity to pay compensation to the Respondent for the land they trespassed upon, after a valuation of same is conducted. See page 49 paragraphs 4 and 5 of the Record of Proceedings (ROA). This is what the court per Sittie J had to say:
“I enter judgment in favour of Plaintiff for all its reliefs endorsed on the writ of summons since Defendants have