IN THE MATTER OF J. K. KPOGO (SUBSTITUTED BY NOBLE KPOGO) v. F. K. FIADZORGBE
2015
SUPREME COURT
GHANA
CORAM
- DOTSE JSC(PRESIDING)
- YEBOAH JSC
- BONNIE JSC
- BAMFO (MRS)JSC
- AKAMBA JSC
Areas of Law
- Civil Procedure
- Property and Real Estate Law
2015
SUPREME COURT
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
This case involves an appeal by the appellant against the decisions of the High Court and the Court of Appeal, both of which ruled in favor of the respondent in a land dispute. The High Court granted several reliefs to the respondent, including a declaration of title and damages for the destruction of coconut trees. The appellant's counterclaims for specific performance and ownership were denied. The Court of Appeal affirmed the High Court's decision. The Supreme Court dismissed the appellant's appeal, confirming the rulings of the lower courts. The legal principles established include the handling of procedural irregularities, the burden of proof, and conditions for appellate interference with trial court findings.
JUDGMENT
AKAMBA, JSC:
This appeal was filed on 23rd July 2001 against the decision of the Court of Appeal pronounced on 19th July 2001 affirming the entire judgment and orders of the court below.
The defendant /appellant/appellant (hereafter simply appellant) who is aggrieved by the decision has appealed to this court seeking an overturn of the decision.
BRIEF FACTS
The plaintiff/respondent/respondent (hereafter simply the respondent) issued a writ of summons at the Tema High Court claiming against the appellant a number of reliefs.
The respondent’s initial reliefs as per his writ were as follows:
(i) Declaration of title to Plot No W/3/394, Ashiaman New Town
(ii) Injunction to restrain the (defendant) appellant herein from ‘unauthorized construction’ on portions of the said plot.
However on 17th May 1994, the respondent filed a notice of amendment seeking to add the following further reliefs:
(iii) Damages for amount of Ȼ1.5 million (old cedis) for 3 fruit yielding coconuts deliberately felled by the defendant on the said land at Ȼ500,000 (old cedis) per tree.
(iv) An order that defendant vacate the said plot forthwith yielding vacant possession to the plaintiff herein.
Then again on 17th June 1994, the respondent filed yet another notice of amendment to add the following relief:
(v) Order for ejectment of defendant and recovery of all that piece and parcel of land occupied by the said defendant on the plot named in the relief one of the endorsement on the writ.
The defendant denied that the (plaintiff) respondent was entitled to his reliefs and asserted his own claims in a counterclaim for:
1. Specific performance by the plaintiff giving letter of transfer to defendant as he has finished paying for the cost of plot No. N/3/394.
2. Declaration that defendant is the rightful owner of plot No. N/3/394, Ashaiman New Town and plaintiff should not interfere with his peaceful occupation of the said land.
The High Court after a full trial entered judgment in favour of the respondent for all the reliefs endorsed on the writ of summons as per the amendments listed above.
THE COURT OF APPEAL
The appellant filed a notice of appeal on 1st August 1996 against the decision of the High Court to the Court of Appeal raising the following grounds for their Lordships’ determination:
(a) That the judgment is against the weight of evidence adduced.
(b) Additional grounds will be filed on the receipt of Judgment and Record of Proceedings.
On 3rd April 2