KORKOR HAYFORD & OTHERS v. ADONGO AYELIKAI
2013
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
- MARIAMA OWUSU, J.A. (PRESIDING)
- GYAESAYOR, J.A.
- DZAMEFE, J.A
Areas of Law
- Civil Procedure
- Evidence Law
- Property and Real Estate Law
2013
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
The High Court of Accra dismissed the plaintiffs' claims regarding House No. D 15/3 Amamomo, affirming the 5th defendant's ownership acquired via public auction. Plaintiffs alleged the property was family-owned and auctioned fraudulently. The appellate court upheld the dismissal, stating plaintiffs failed to prove the house was family property and breached procedural burdens, despite claims of inadequate notice and procedural improprieties during the auction.
JUDGMENT
MARIAMA OWUSU, J.A:
On 31-5-2010, the High Court, Accra, dismissed plaintiffs’ claim for declaration of title to House No. D 15/3 Amamomo as family property and Perpetual Injunction restraining the defendants, their agents, assigns, privies and all those claiming through them from interfering with the disputed land as not proved. The court then gave judgment for the 5th defendant on his counterclaim as follows;
“A counterclaim is in the nature of a fresh claim and the counter claimant has the burden to prove his counterclaim to the satisfaction of the court, but following my finding that the auction of House No. D15/3 was regularly conducted, it follows that 5th defendant is entitled to a declaration that he lawfully acquired House No. D15/3, in the public auction and I so declare.
Plaintiffs, their agent’s assigns, successors etc are hereby restrained from interfering with 5th defendant’s peaceful possession and enjoyment of House No. D15/3, Amamomo, Accra. 5th defendant is also entitled to accrued rent or mesne profits”.
Dissatisfied with the decision of the court, the plaintiffs appealed to this court on the following grounds:
a. That the judgment is against the weight of evidence.
b. That the trial judge failed to appreciate the evidence led as to the family nature of the property in dispute.
c. That the trial judge placed a greater burden of proof on plaintiffs/appellants than the Law required.
d. That the trial court declared the auction sale as transparent when it failed to comply with the rules of the court.
e. That the order made by the trial court to pay rent by plaintiffs/appellants is without legal basis.
f. Additional grounds of appeal will be filed upon receipt of the record of proceedings.
The relief sought from this court is that the judgment of the trial court be set aside and judgment delivered in favour of the plaintiffs.
The brief facts of the case are that; the plaintiffs/appellants claimed against the defendants the following reliefs;
1. Declaration that House No. D15/3 Amamomo, Accra is family property.
2. Declaration that execution levied on House No. D15/3 Amamomo, Accra is fraudulent and same be set aside.
3. Perpetual injunction restraining the defendants, their agents, assigns from dealing with House No. D15/3 Amamomo, Accra in anyway detrimental to the interest of plaintiffs and specifically signing any certificate of purchase in respect of the said house.
In the statement of claim that accompanied