2019
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
This case involves a dispute over a 16.60-acre parcel of land in Agona Swedru. After Plaintiffs filed a writ claiming title and damages, they obtained an interlocutory injunction to prevent Defendants from altering the land's status. Defendants, citing previous judgments, argued against this injunction but were unsuccessful. The Court of Appeal upheld the High Courts decision, emphasizing the need to maintain status quo and balance of convenience. Key legal principles involved included the requirements for granting interlocutory injunctions and the necessity of proper service of court notices.
J U D G M E N T:
LAWRENCE L. MENSAH, J.A.
This is an appeal launched by the Defendants/Appellants who will be referred to as Defendants against the ruling of the High Court Swedru dated the 29th day of March 2018 in favour of the Plaintiffs/Respondents who will be referred to as the Plaintiffs.
The subject-matter of this appeal is in respect of a snap ruling in open court given by the learned trial Judge in respect of an interlocutory injunction application filed by the Plaintiffs to restrain the Defendants, their assigns, privies, agents, workmen etc. from entering, developing, putting up new structures, or alienating any portion of the disputed land pending the final determination of the substantive suit.
Facts:
A brief facts of this appeal is as follows:- On the 10th day of January 2018, the Plaintiffs filed a writ of summons and statement of claim against the Defendants claiming a declaration of title to a parcel of land lying and being at Kwansakrom in the Agona Swedru area of the Central Region covering an area of 16.60 acres with the boundaries described. The Plaintiffs also claim recovery of possession, special damages of GH¢966.00 and General damages for trespass and perpetual injunction against the Defendants.
The Plaintiffs are the Proprietors of Swedru Preparatory School, a.k.a Swedru International School, known by its acronym as SWIS. In its affidavit in support of the application for the interlocutory injunction, the Plaintiffs deposed that they acquired the disputed land initially through leasehold in 1979. The leasehold interest was converted into a gift about 19 years ago by their grantors. The Plaintiffs deposed that after acquiring the land they went into effective possession and occupation by putting up several building structures and facilities to operate a preparatory school with boarding facilities thereon. A further deposition of the Plaintiffs is that the Defendants claiming to have secured a judgment on the Kwansakrom lands have entered portions of the disputed land and sold same to third parties who are developing the land with rapid alacrity. It is the contention of Plaintiffs that they are not aware of any judgment in favour of Defendants, since same has not been served on them as confirmed by a search report attached, to their application.
Plaintiffs’ further case is that having unlawfully entered their land, agents of Defendants have caused damage to portions of a wall they built to protect their property and also dama