JAMES TOAH AGYARE (SUBSTITUTED BY BENJAMIN AYENSU) v. SOLOMON OPARE ADDO QUAYNOR & ORS
2016
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
- ADJEI, JA – PRESIDING
- CECILIA H. SOWAH, JA
- L.L. MENSAH, JA
Areas of Law
- Property and Real Estate Law
- Evidence Law
- Civil Procedure
2016
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
In this case, the Plaintiff claimed title, recovery of possession, perpetual injunction, and damages concerning a disputed land, which the Circuit Court granted. However, the Defendants appealed, objecting on the grounds of evidential support and fraud in obtaining certain exhibit deeds. The Court of Appeal scrutinized the case, particularly addressing the issues of statute of limitations and fraud. The Court noted the legal principle that appellate courts should generally defer to trial court findings unless plainly unsupported by evidence. It found no substantial proof of fraud and emphasized that the statute of limitations had lapsed, thereby barring the Plaintiff’s claim. Consequently, the initial judgment was overturned, and an injunction was issued favoring the Defendants. The Court also dismissed the Defendant’s counterclaim for special damages due to insufficient proof.
ADJEI, J.A:
The Plaintiff sued the Defendants at the trial Circuit Court claiming for a declaration of title, recovery of possession of the disputed land at Aburi Kitase, an order for perpetual injunction and general damages.
The Defendants disputed the Plaintiff’s claim. The Defendants in their amended statement of defence filed pursuant to the order of the trial Circuit Court granted on 23rd February, 2014 denied the Plaintiff’s claim and counterclaimed against the Plaintiff for the same land. The Defendants in their paragraph 8 (a) of this statement of defence averred that the Plaintiff’s action is statute barred and therefore not maintainable in law. The Defendants averred that the Plaintiff’s claim is not maintainable in law by reason of the fact that the 1st Defendant registered the land in accordance with law and has since been in undisturbed possession of same for barely twenty years. The 1st Defendant’s further counterclaimed for declaration of title, general damages for trespass and two hundred Ghana cedis (GH¢200.00) specific damages being the value of the 1st Defendant’s teak on the land which were destroyed by the Plaintiff.
The trial Circuit Court heard the matter, gave judgment in favour of the Plaintiff and dismissed the 1st Defendant’s counterclaim. The Defendants being dissatisfied with the judgment of the trial Circuit Court filed an appeal against same to this Court.
The original grounds of appeal were two and they are as follows:
“a. That the judgment of the Honourable Court cannot be supported having regard to the evidence.
b. That the Honourable court erred in law in deciding that the title deeds of the appellant tendered as exhibits 2, 3, 4, and 5 were obtained by fraud”.
On 26th April, 2016 this Court granted leave to the Defendants/Appellants to amend his grounds of appeal and same was accordingly amended and filed within time. The amended grounds of appeal are as follows:
“a. That the judgment of the Honourable Trial Court is against the weight of evidence.
b. That the trial High court erred in holding that no concrete evidence had been led by 1st Defendant to indicate that Plaintiff’s action before the Court in respect of exhibit 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 (inclusive) were statute barred.
c. That the trial judge erred in law in deciding suo motu, in the absence of any evidence on the record that exhibits 2, 3, 4, and 5 were obtained.
d. That the trial Judge failed to adequately examine the composite plan submitted by the Defen