KWABENA APPIAH v. REV. EDMUND LARYEA ADJEI

Reasons for Judgment

Sophia A. B. Akuffo, J.S.C.:

On 16th October 2007, this Court unanimously allowed the Appellant’s appeal herein and reserved its reasons for delivery today. The reasons for our judgment are as follows:-

Background

The genesis of this appeal is that, sometime in or about the year 2002, the Respondent, who is the Pastor of a Church known as the Bethel Praise Ministries International, sold to the Appellant a piece of land situate at McCarthy Hill, Accra. No formal documents were executed evidencing the sale but the fact of the sale is not disputed by either party. The Appellant made a down-payment of ¢120,000,000.00, in respect of which the Respondent issued to him a receipt dated 8th January 2002. According to the Appellant, very shortly after making the said payment, he discovered that the Respondent had previously sold the same piece of land to another person, Construction Pioneers Company Limited. He, therefore, demanded a refund of the said down-payment, less ¢20,000,000.00, which he asked the Respondent to keep. The Respondent having failed to make the refund as demanded, the Appellant, issued a writ against him in the High Court (suit No. C1098/02) for the recovery of the said down-payment. By a summary judgment entered on 21st March 2003, the court found in favour of the Appellant on his claim and adjudged the Respondent liable to him in the full amount of ¢120,000,000.00 together with interest thereon at the prevailing bank rate, plus costs of ¢6,000,000.00. The Appellant, therefore, filed an entry of judgment for the recovery of a total sum of ¢181,500,000.00, whereupon the Respondent herein, on April 2nd 2003 applied to the High Court for orders of stay of execution and payment by instalments. By his affidavit in support of that application, the Respondent undertook to pay an amount of ¢40,000,000.00 by 30th April, 2003 and settle the remaining balance within 6months. (This affidavit is of particular interest because, in other paragraphs, the Respondent herein deposed to the fact that at the time of the purported sale, the land was already in the possession of a Lessee who had promised to surrender the lease to him, and that the said Lessee had failed to surrender the land and had, rather, sought to sell the same to another person.)

It appears that the Appellant herein did not oppose the application for stay and payment by instalments and the court granted the application on 4th May 2003. However, as admitted by the Respon