This is an Application by the 1st Defendant/Applicant praying the Court for an order setting aside the Writ of Summons and or striking out the name of the 1st Defendant as a party.
On the 11th day of August, 2022 the Plaintiff instituted the instant action against the Defendants claiming the following reliefs:
a. A declaration by the Court that Plaintiff is the legal and beneficial owner of all that piece and parcel of land situate, lying and being at Quartey-Papafio Hill (Santeo), Tema in the Greater Accra Region of the Republic of Ghana bounded on the North by Assignor's property measuring one hundred feet and three inches (100.3) feet more or less on the East by a proposed road measuring seventy-five feet and two inches (75.2) more or less on the South by Assignor's property measuring one hundred feet and three inches (100.3) more or less on the West by Assignor's property measuring seventy-five feet and two inches (75.2) and covering an approximate area of 0.17 acres or 0.07 hectares as described in the document of transfer executed between Plaintiff and 2nd Defendant;
b. Recovery of possession of the Land.
c. A perpetual injunction restraining the 1st and 2nd Defendants, their agents, workmen, assigns from interfering, entering or in any manner whatsoever dealing with the Plaintiff's Land;
d. An order directed at Defendants to pay damages for trespass onto the Plaintiff's Land;
e. Cost including solicitor's fees;
f. Further or other relief(s) as the Honorable Court may deem fit to award.
On the service of the Writ of Summons and the attached Statement of Claim on the 1st Defendant he caused his lawyers to enter a Conditional Appearance and thereafter brought the instant Application.
The question is whether or not after entering a Conditional Appearance the Applicant could apply for the reliefs sought.
The Supreme Court speaking through Kpegah JSC has been very clear on the
circumstances under which a Defendant could enter Conditional Appearance.
In Republic v High Court Accra; Ex Parte Aryeetey (Ankrah Interested Party) 2003-2004 SGCLR @ page 408, the Court held:
We describe the grounds for seeking to set aside the Writ after the Entry of
a Conditional Appearance as “unfortunate” because the circumstances under which the Defendant can enter a Conditional Appearance and thereby have the right to apply to set aside the Writ ought to be known to every practitioner given audience in this Court. But for the avoidance of doubt, we would like t
