2012
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
This Court of Appeal decision concerns land at Awoshie (Baah Yard) bequeathed by the late C. C. K. Baah to his children. After initially leasing from the 2nd plaintiff, the 1st defendant later obtained a conveyance from Cecilia Morkor Baah and land title certificates over plots including 124 and 126. The parties executed terms of settlement on 8 April 2009 for GH¢40,000, with commitments to remove the Odorkor Tipper Truck Drivers and discontinue pending suits. The 2nd plaintiff repudiated the settlement within days, and the appellants sued to set it aside, alleging shoddy preparation, inadequate consideration, and undue influence/unconscionability, while seeking declarations of title, cancellation of specific land certificates, re‑registration, rent arrears, and related reliefs. The High Court summarily dismissed the suit under Order 11 rule 18 and inherent jurisdiction, entered judgment for the 1st defendant on its counterclaim, and awarded costs. On appeal, the Court of Appeal held that allegations of undue influence and unconscionability require trial, reversed the summary dismissal, struck out a duplicative notice of appeal, and remitted the matter for full trial.
AYEBI J. A.
In this appeal the plaintiffs/appellants are praying this court to set aside the ruling of the High Court dated 10th March 2010 against them.
In that ruling, the High Court upheld the 1st defendant/respondent’s application to dismiss the suit under Order 11 r. 18 of the High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules, 2004 (C. I. 47) and under the inherent jurisdiction of the court.
a) A declaration of ownership or title to their father’s property situated at Awoshie popularly referred to as Baah Yard.
b) A declaration that the 1st defendant is estopped from denying their title and rights to the said properties.
c) An order setting aside the terms of settlement executed between 2nd plaintiff and 1st defendant on 8th April 2009 on the grounds of shoddy and incompetent preparation, inadequate consideration and undue influence and unconscionability.
d) An order that the parties enter into a new settlement on terms different from the old one, Or
(e) In the alternative, 1st defendant be ordered to pay compensation to the plaintiffs based on court ordered valuation report.
f) An order directed at 2nd defendant to re-register the Awoshie lands (Baah Yard) in the name of the appellants who will convey same to the 1st defendant.
g) An order directed at 1st defendant to pay arrears of rent to the plaintiffs, and(h) General damages against the 1st defendant for the unlawful demolition of structures on plaintiffs’ land.
The above reliefs to me, is the gist of the plaintiffs claim against the defendants, particularly, the 1st defendant.
But then these reliefs are couched in long winding sentences to the point that they have become almost incomprehensible and contradictory.
I reluctantly recap them as appeared in the amended writ of summons filed on 20th May 2009:
a) An order (against 1st defendant only) that by virtue of the 1st defendant initiating, executing and subjecting itself to the terms of settle dated the 8th April 2009 between 1st defendant and 2nd plaintiff regarding parcels 124 and 126 at Awoshie, Accra, the subject matter of High Court suit Nos. E533/98 and L511/02, the 1st defendant has, notwithstanding the conveyance made by Mrs. Cecilia Morkor Baah(2nd deceased) on the said lands to it, admitted and acknowledged that plaintiffs are, nonetheless the rightful owners of those parcels of land by virtue of sections 16 and 20 of plaintiff’s late father’s will dated 2/01/72 and admitted to probate on the 17th February 1972 and therefore:
(i) 1st d