NII OKWEI KINKA DOWUONA v. v. MRS. LIALA TETTEH

DZAMEFE, JA

The plaintiff/respondent/appellant hereinafter referred to simply as the plaintiff issued this writ in the High Court against the defendant/applicant/respondent also referred to as defendants for the following reliefs; -

a. A declaration that all that piece or parcel of land at Maamobi-Accra bounded on the North-East by a land measuring 79 feet more or less of the South-East by lessors land measuring 130 feet more or less on the North-West by a Highway street measuring 120 feet more or less on the South-West by Nima Highway measuring 30 feet more or less on the and containing an approximate area of 0.24 Acre more or less as contained in the defendants said indenture is part of Osu stool land.

b. A declaration that Ashong Omaboe not being Osu Mantse or acting Osu Mantse has no capacity to grant the land in dispute.

c. An order nullifying the defendant’s’ late husband’s grant.

d. Perpetual injunction restraining the defendant her agents, workers, servants, assigns etc. from laying claim to or interfering with the land in dispute.

e. Recovery of possession

f. General damages

The plaintiff is the occupant of the Osu Stool and brings this action for himself and the Osu Stool. The plaintiff in his statement of claim averred that the Osu Stool is the allodial owner of a vast land in Accra including Kotobabi, Mamobi and Dzorwulu and this ownership is confirmed by many judicial decisions. It is the plaintiff’s case that it has recently come to his attention that the defendant is constructing a fence wall on a portion of their stool land at Maamobi. Plaintiff averred he confronted the defendant to stop but she has refused on the grounds that the land in dispute was granted to her late husband by the Osu Stool per one Ashong Omaboe supported by an indenture dated 3rd January 1986.

The plaintiff submits that any purported grant of the land in dispute to the defendant’s late husband was void, fraudulent and by mistake. That the defendant’s late husband’s grantor, Ashong Omaboe, who was parading himself as the Osiahene of Osu was nullified by the Quarcoo Report and the Ollenu settlement panel on Osu Chieftaincy Affairs. That the said Ashong Omaboe has never been duly appointed as acting Osu Mantse.

The plaintiff listed the particulars of fraud as; -

a. The defendant claims her late husband obtained the land from the Osu Stool which is false.

b. Ashong Omaboe who granted the land in dispute to the defendant’s late husband has never been the Osu Ma