MONICA ADWOA AIKINS vs NANA ARHIN CARTER & ANOR

By her writ of summons filed on 20th September 2021, the plaintiff claims the following reliefs: “i. Declaration of title to H/No PT61; No. 18 Araba Wilson Avenue, (H/No. PT 61; Tadisco Down Bankyease) West Tanokrom.

Perpetual injunction restraining the Defendants by themselves or through their agents and assigns from doing anything inconsistent with the Plaintiff’s rights ownership and control of H/No PT 61; 18 Araba Wilson Avenue, (H/No. PT 61; Tadisco Down Bankyease) West Tanokrom.

Any other(s) as the court deems fit”. It is the plaintiff’s case that the defendants have fraudulently connived to deprive her of her property.

According to her, she is the owner of H/No. 61, 18 Araba Wilson Avenue, West Tanokrom.

In 2020, the 1st defendant expressed his interest in purchasing the house.

They agreed on the purchase price of GHc800, 000. 00, and which oral agreement was reduced into writing.

By the said agreement, the 1st defendant was to make full payment of the purchase price of GHc800, 000. 00 by the close of February 2021. However, as of the close of February 2021, the 1st defendant had only paid GHc270, 000. 00, and all calls on him to pay the balance had proved futile.

Instead, the 1st defendant claimed that per the agreement executed between them, the property's purchase price was GHc270, 000. 00. As expected of the defendants, they denied the plaintiff’s allegations against them.

In their statement of defence, they averred that upon negotiations, the agreed price of the house was pegged at GHc270, 000. 00, which the 1st defendant paid to the plaintiff.

Subsequently, the plaintiff executed a deed of sale to the 1st defendant in the 2nd defendant’s name in the presence of the registrar of the High Court, Sekondi.

After the execution of the document, the plaintiff introduced them to the tenants of the house and ordered the tenants to atone tenancy to them.

They took possession of the house and started to renovate it.

They counterclaimed for the following reliefs: “a) An order directed at the Plaintiff estopping Plaintiff from laying claim to the disputed house No. PT 61; No. 18 Araba Wilson Avenue, which she has duly sold to Defendants and the agreed consideration paid to her.

b) Perpetual injunction restraining the Plaintiff, her agents, assigns, workmen from having anything to do with the disputed house.

c) Cost”. After the close of pleadings, the following issues were set down for trial: i. Whether or not H/No. 61, 18 Araba Wilson Avenue,