Mrs. Georgina Baah and Anor v. Mrs. Victoria Assah Offei
2016
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
- JUSTICE G. S. SUURBAAREH
Areas of Law
- Contract Law
- Property and Real Estate Law
2016
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
The case involves a dispute over land sold by the 1st Plaintiff to the Defendant, and later resold to the 2nd Plaintiff after the Defendant failed to pay the balance. The court found that the Plaintiffs were not justified in their claims against the Defendant, as there was insufficient evidence of repeated demands for payment and time being of the essence. The court held that the Defendant had substantially performed the contract, making her the rightful owner, and awarded her costs and the unpaid balance with interest to the 1st Plaintiff.
Per their amended writ of summons of 18th July, 2016, the Plaintiffs’ claim against the Defendant is for the following reliefs: -(a)Declaration that the 1st Plaintiff had sold and the 2nd Plaintiff had purchased the land the subject-matter in the suit and that the 2nd Defendant is in lawful possession; (b)Declaration that the 2nd Plaintiff lawfully bought the land in dispute without the slightest knowledge that the 1st Plaintiff had dealings with the Defendant concerning the land(c) Perpetual injunction; and(d)Damages for trespass.
In support of the above reliefs the Plaintiffs, in their amended statement of claim of 18th July, 2016, pursuant to leave granted on 15th July, 2016, averred that the 1st Plaintiff, as beneficial owner of the land in dispute, who was in dire financial straights, sold same to the Defendant for Fifty-Two Million Old Cedis (¢52, 000, 000. 00) out of which the Defendant made a part payment of Thirty-Five Million Old Cedis (¢35, 000, 000. 00). According to the Plaintiffs, that the Defendant, who was aware that time was of the essence in this agreement, however failed to pay the difference after persistent demands and that, to avoid embarrassment from her creditors, the 1st Plaintiff, after warning the Defendant, sold the land to the 2nd Plaintiff and informed the Defendant to come for the deposit she had paid.
The Plaintiffs, who averred that the Defendant was not given an indenture because she had not made full payment, went on to contend that the 2nd Plaintiff, who was led by the caretaker on the land to the 1st Plaintiff, negotiated and bought the land and was given an indenture on 17th May, 2007 with which he went on to register the land.
The 2nd Plaintiff who went on to aver that neither the caretaker nor 1st Plaintiff gave him any hint about the earlier sale to the Defendant, added that it was after he had been on the land for one year and had started to develop same that the Defendant came to demolish his profile resulting in the matter going before the Kwabenya Police station where he met the Defendant for the 1st time.
According to the 2nd Plaintiff, whilst the Defendant could only produce a site plan to the Police, he produced a site plan, and an indenture which was in the process of being registered.
He then concluded that the Defendant has recently started to deposit some materials on the land when her contract had been abrogated.
In response to the above averments, the Defendant, per her amended statement of defenc