MICHAEL KOFI SINTIM & ORS vs GEORGE BOATENG & ORS
2019
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
- HER LADYSHIP JUSTICE BARBARA TETTEH-CHARWAY (MRS)
Areas of Law
- Property and Real Estate Law
- Probate and Succession
- Contract Law
- Civil Procedure
2019
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
This High Court case, decided by Her Ladyship Justice Barbara Tetteh‑Charway, concerned ownership and recovery of four shops (nos. 4, 5, 19 and 21) in House D785/4, Okaishie, Accra, forming part of the estate of the late Madam Comfort Oforiwaa. The plaintiffs, beneficiaries under a will probated in 2012 and vested with the stores, served the tenant‑defendants with six months’ statutory notice seeking vacant possession and mesne profits, asserting they required the premises for their own business. The 1st and 2nd defendants admitted previous tenancies under the deceased landlord and pointed to District Court Terms of Settlement adopted as consent judgment that contemplated five‑year renewals at rent to be agreed; they paid monies into court and sought rent assessment, but executors discontinued those proceedings. The High Court held the plaintiffs were not bound by the consent judgment, and that the defendants’ prior tenancies had expired, yet the plaintiffs failed to prove reasonable need for their own business under section 17(1)(h) of the Rent Act. Possession and eviction were granted only against the 3rd defendant, who denied plaintiffs’ title. The Registrar was directed to appoint a Rent Officer to assess fair rent.
The Plaintiffs’ case is that by a will dated 1st May 2001, probate of which was granted by the High Court on 26th June 2012, they became beneficial owners of store numbers 4, 5, 19 and 21 located in House Number D785/4, Okaishie.
The said stores formed part of the estate of the late Madam Comfort Oforiwaa, who, during her lifetime was the Defendants’ landlord.
After the stores, subject matter of this suit, had been vested in the Plaintiffs by a vesting assent, they caused their lawyer to serve the Defendants with the statutory six (6) months’notice to vacate the premises as they desired to recover them for their own business purposes.
Plaintiffs’ case is that although the statutory notice period expired on 4th March 2015, the Defendants have failed or refused to vacate the stores and will not surrender the stores to them without a Court order.
The Plaintiffs therefore pray for the following reliefs;
1. Recovery of vacant possession of their shops being occupied by the Defendants.
2. Mesne profit from 4th September, 2014 to date of recovery of vacant possession.
In his statement of defence, the 1st Defendant admitted that he was a tenant of the late Madam Comfort Oforiwaa and is currently occupying one of the stores subject matter of this dispute.
He claims that the executors of the will of the late Comfort Oforiwaa, acting with the knowledge of some of the Plaintiffs in this suit, took legal action against him and other tenants for recovery of their stores.
In the course of proceedings before the District Court, they attorned tenancy to the executors and the parties filed Terms of Settlement which were adopted by the Court as consent judgment.
Pursuant to the said Terms of Settlement, the 1st Defendant claims that he paid money into Court.
However, the executors discontinued the action before the District Court and the Plaintiffs filed the instant suit.
The said discontinuance of the action before the District Court after consent judgment had been entered is the subject of a judicial review application filed by 1st Defendant’s lawyer.
The 1st Defendant maintains that the Plaintiffs are not entitled to their claim because by virtue of the Terms of Settlement which were adopted as consent judgment at the District Court, he is entitled to a five (5) year extension of his tenancy, as well as, a further renewal of his tenancy for five (5) years.
The 2nd Defendant, in her statement of defence, also admitted that she was a tenant occupying one of