Try asking the following...
Try asking the following...
February 7, 2019
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
The case of the Plaintiff as captured by his Amended Statement dated the 24th day of November, 2011 is that he is a Ghanaian who owns the subject land in issue and that the 1st Defendant is a communication Company doing business in Ghana.
That the Defendant has erected a communication mast on his land.
It is the case of the Plaintiff that all efforts is to get a just and fair compensation for the said unauthorised presence of the 1st Defendant on Plaintiff’s land have failed.
And that series of correspondence between solicitors of Plaintiff and the 1st Defendant ended up in unfulfilled promises of coming for negotiated settlement.
According to the Plaintiff he has a Land Certificate backing his claim that the land is at Gbawe in Accra upon which the 1st Defendant has erected the mast belongs to him.
That the Defendant is playing hide and seek with him and that unless the Court steps in the 1st Defendant will not pay any compensation to him.
Based on these facts the Plaintiff claims the following against the Defendant:
i. Recovery of a sum of money representing fair and just compensation for being on Plaintiff’s land at a rate of 1, 000 Ghana cedis per month from 1st January 2010 until 31st December, 2025.
ii. In contesting the claim of the Plaintiff the 1st Defendant entered an appearance and also filed a defence.
Per the defence the 1st Defendant pleaded as follows:
“1. Save as hereinafter expressly admitted the Defendant denies each and every allegation of fact contained in the Statement of Claim as if the same were set out in extensor and traversed seriatim.
2. Defendant is not in a position to deny or admit paragraph 1 of the Statement of Claim.
3. Paragraph 2 of the Statement of Claim is admitted.
4. Defendant deny paragraph 3 of the Statement of Claim and says that Defendant in all cases obtains lease from the owners of land before erecting its mast.
5. Defendant in further response to paragraph 3 of the Statement of Claim says that when the Plaintiff through his Counsel informed the Defendant by a letter dated February 2, 2011 about the alleged erection of mast on Plaintiff’s land, the Legal Department of the Defendant called Plaintiff’s Counsel to obtained more details namely the location of the mast and whether or not the Plaintiff had an agreement with the Defendant.
6. Defendant says that the Plaintiff’s Counsel indicated that the mast is located at Sowutuom a suburb of Accra and that he was unsure whether or not Plaintiff ha
AI Generated Summary
In a land title dispute at Gbawe, Accra, the Plaintiff asserted ownership supported by a Land Certificate (Exhibit C) and sought compensation after a communications mast was erected on the property by Zain, now Airtel Ghana Limited. The 2nd Defendant claimed he granted the land to Airtel, initially asserting a Weija Stool origin and later producing an indenture from Nunoo tied to Gbawe Stool (Exhibit 1) dated in 2014. The court underscored the burden of proof and the indefeasible nature of registered title under Section 43, with a presumption of regularity for official acts. Weighing the evidence, it preferred the Plaintiffs Land Certificate over the 2nd Defendants later, inconsistent claim, noting the Plaintiffs 2004 acquisition and registration. The court entered judgment for the Plaintiff per the writs endorsement and awarded costs against both Defendants.