2022
SUPREME COURT
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
The Supreme Court reviewed the dispute between the La Stool, acting through the Plaintiff/Appellant/Appellant, and the 3rd Defendants/Respondents, the Nikoitse We family of La Nkwantanang, over land at Madina known as the VRA park. The Appellant sought declaratory title, injunctions, possession, cancellation of land records, damages, rent, and costs, while the Respondents counterclaimed for title, possession, damages for trespass, and injunctive relief. The High Court dismissed the Appellant’s case and granted the Respondents’ counterclaim; the Court of Appeal affirmed. On further appeal, the Supreme Court held that, in light of Nartey and Ago Sai, BOI OWUSU does not operate as res judicata here; the La Stool’s title can be lost through acquiescence. The Court found long-standing acquiescence and possession by the Respondents, rejected the 4th Defendant’s incomplete acquisition claim, applied limitation and estoppel, and, finding no basis to disturb concurrent findings, dismissed the appeal and affirmed the Court of Appeal.
AMADU JSC:-
(1)This appeal is from the judgment of the Court of Appeal which wholly affirmed the judgment of the Trial High Court and dismissed the appeal of the Plaintiff/Appellant/Appellant in its entirety.
(2)In the High Court, the Plaintiff/Appellant/Appellant (herein after referred to as the “Appellant”) took out a writ of summons against several Defendants including the 3rd Defendants/Respondents/Respondents (hereinafter referred to as the “Respondents”), the only Respondent to the instant appeal. The Appellant had sought the following reliefs.
“1. A declaration of title to a parcel of land located at Madina
popularly known as VRA park and particularly described in the writ of summons as all that piece of land bounded on the North by Plaintiff’s land measuring 650 feet more or less, on the South by a road measuring 720 feet more or less, on the East by a road measuring 620 feet more or less and on the West by a road containing an approximate Area of 5 acres more or less.
2. An order terminating the license between the Plaintiff and the 4th
Defendant for breach of covenant in the conditional license dated 9th September 1968.
3. Perpetual injunction to restrain the Defendants their agents,
assigns, servants and heirs from interfering with the Plaintiff’s peaceful possession and ownership of the said land.
4. An order for the 11th and 12th Defendants to deliver up for
cancellation indenture with Registration Number LVB 3075/07 together with Land Certificates Numbers GA.23729 and GA.22821.
5. Recovery of possession
6. General Damages.
7. Rent from the 4th Defendant from 9th September 1968 to the date
of judgment.
8. Cost ”.
(3)The 3rd Defendants/Respondents herein, not only contested the Appellant’s action at the trial court, but they set up a counterclaim for the following reliefs:-
“(i) A declaration that as joint heads and lawful representatives of the
Nikoitse We of La Nkwantanang they are absolutely and beneficially entitled to all that track of land described in the Plaintiff’s statement of claim.
(ii) Recovery of possession of the said land.
(iii) Damages for trespass.
(iv) Perpetual injunction restraining the Plaintiff by himself, agents,
servants, privies assigns or otherwise howsoever from entering, using or in any manner interfering with the 3rd Defendant family’s possession or control of the disputed land.
(4)While the 4th Defendant on record at all material times asserted that, it lawfully acquired its interest