FELIX KORTO VS MYTIME REALITY ESTATES CO. LTD & ORS
2024
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
- HER LADYSHIP NABEELA NAEEMA WAHAB J. (MS.)
Areas of Law
- Civil Procedure
- Property and Real Estate Law
2024
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
The Plaintiff claimed ownership of a disputed property and sought various legal reliefs, including setting aside a high court judgment attachment and auction sale. The Defendants asserted the land was lawfully purchased at auction. The court analyzed legal documents and procedural compliance, finding that the Plaintiff did not follow correct procedures to challenge the writ of possession and auction. Consequently, the action was dismissed as frivolous, vexatious, and an abuse of process, with the Plaintiff ordered to pay costs.
I. PLAINTIFF’S CASE
1. The Plaintiff instituted an action against four named Defendants by a Writ and Statement of Claim filed on 18th April 2023. The 5th Defendant was subsequently joined to the suit and an amended Writ and Statement of Claim was filed on 8th August 2023. 2. It is the case of the Plaintiff that he is the legal and bonafide owner of a parcel of land measuring approximately 0. 636 acres, situate at Ajiringano in the Greater Accra Region, known as No. 24, Nii Tsawe Street, with digital address number GD-237-0041, hereafter also referred to as the “subject land/ property”. 3. The Plaintiff stated that he acquired the subject land by way of a lease dated 1st January 1994 from the Ashong Mlitse Family of Odaitei Tse We for a term of 99 years, he registered his interest in the subject land and was issued with Land Title Certificate No. TD.
0898. 4. It is also the case of the Plaintiff that there has not been any legal action to challenge his or his grantors interest in the subject property, rather, he instituted Suit No. GJ/1081/2022 intituled Felix Korto vrs Nuumo Badu Odaano Odiapenser I & Anor to assert his right and interest in the subject land when some persons trespassed on it.
5. The Plaintiff maintains that he has been in effective and quiet possession of the subject land for over 28 years and at all material times his caretaker was resident in a three-bedroom boys’ quarters or apartment on the subject property.
The Plaintiff added that about six years ago he began the construction of two structures on the subject land.
He stated that the construction was done openly and one of the buildings, a one storey-building had been roofed whilst the other was at a foundation stage.
6. In paragraphs 32 to 34 of the Amended Statement of Claim, the Plaintiff stated that sometime in the year 2022, it was brought to his attention that the subject property had been attached in execution of the judgment delivered by the High Court in Tema in Suit No. E2/045/22 intituled Mytime Realty Estate Company Ltd vrs Menda Development &Construction Limited.
The Plaintiff added that he noted that the property described in the Writ of Possession was different from the subject property and he immediately caused his lawyers to file a Notice of Claim in Suit No E2/045/22. In the Notice of Claim, he indicated that the subject property had been wrongly attached by the Sheriff of the High Court in Tema.
7. The Plaintiff also stated that he was not served with