FRED ADORMSON & ORS V. MRS. LYELA TETTEH

BY COURT:

The Plaintiffs by their writ of summons filed on 14th December, 2006 which was subsequently amended on 28th November, 2007 claimed the following reliefs, which have been quoted verbatim.

I. Declaration of title and recovery of possession.

II. An Order for ratification of the Land Register by removing the Plaintiff’s freehold estate from it.

III. Perpetual injunction, restraining the Defendant by himself, his servants, agents workmen and privies from interfering with the land the subject matter of this action or dealing with any part thereof in whatsoever manner.

IV. An amount of ¢450 million being the cost of the destroyed wire mesh, and wooden post fence, two fish ponds and stock of fish and fingerlings.

V. General Damages for trespass and cost.

The amended statement of claim that accompanied the writ of summons described the Plaintiffs as the Administrators of the Estate of the late Nene Okle Amponsah VII known in private life as Alexander Adormson. That the said Alexander Adormson who died on 28th December, 2001 was the sole proprietor of NALEX FARM. That on 19th April 1982, the late Alexander Adormson acquired two parcels of land in the name of NALEX FARM. The two parcels of land were described in schedules ‘A’ and ‘B’ in an indenture that was issued to him and was registered at Land Registry as No. 2585/1982. The statement of claim went further that two fish ponds were constructed on the land, but sometime in 2005, the Defendant trespassed unto the land and destroyed the fish pond, and the stocks of fish and fingerlings.

The Defendant denied that he had destroyed any fish pond and stocks of fish, and counterclaimed for Declaration of title to the parcel of land with land title certificate No. TD1494 issued on the 24th January, 2006.

On 17th April, 2008, the Original issues filed by the Plaintiffs on 28th February, 2008 were set down as the issues for trial as the additional issues were stuck out.

The issues set down for determination are as follows:

a) Whether or not the land in dispute belongs to the estate of the late Nene Okle Amponsah IV also known as Alexander Adomson.

b) Whether or not there was a fenced fish pond stocked with fish on the land in dispute.

c) Whether or not the Defendant trespassed on to the land in dispute and destroyed the fish pond with its stock of fish and the fence.

d) Whether or not the Defendant at all material times knew that the land in