NII TSUI ALABI & OTHERS v. EKOW RICHARDSON & ANOTHER
2021
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
- HENRY KWOFIE JA PRESIDING
- P. BRIGHT MENSAH JA
- OBENG-MANU JNR JA
Areas of Law
- Civil Procedure
- Property and Real Estate Law
- Evidence Law
2021
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
The Court of Appeal (Henry Kwofie JA presiding, P. Bright Mensah JA, and Obeng-Manu Jnr JA) reviewed a land dispute between the estate administrators of Phebe Nii Amasah and Ekow Richardson with successors of the Numo Kofi Anum family of Tesa. The plaintiffs relied on a 1990 Nungua Stool lease and Land Title Certificate GA 12317. The High Court had dismissed their claims and upheld a counterclaim, treating earlier litigation (including suit L.383/89) as binding. On appeal, Bright Mensah JA held that res judicata was misapplied because the plaintiffs were not parties or privies and had acquired the land before that litigation. The court also found inconsistencies in the defendants land identity and reversed the counterclaim. Obeng-Manu Jnr JA concurred and directed the Land Title Registry to cancel any defendant registration and restore GA 12317; Henry Kwofie JA agreed.
BRIGHT MENSAH JA:
This appeal is against the judgment of the High Court, Accra delivered 25/05/2015 that went in favour of the defendants/respondents, as against the plaintiffs/appellants herein. Being dissatisfied with, and aggrieved by the decision of the trial court, the plaintiffs/appellants have mounted the instant appeal filed with this court on 29/05/2015 on a number of grounds, namely:
i) The judgment is against the weight of evidence before the
court.
ii) The learned trial judge erred in law by failing to require 2nd
defendant to prove the condition precedent for the application
of res judicatem, namely same subject matter which 2nd defend-
ant failed to prove in this case.
iii) The learned trial judge erred by holding that the judgment in suit
No. L383/89 is binding on plaintiffs who have acquired usufruct-
tuary interest in the land before the said suit was instituted which
holding is contrary to the principle of law stated in the Supreme Court case of Attram v Aryee (1965) GLR 341.
iv) The trial judge misdirected herself to the effect of the judgment
in Suit No. 383/89 on non parties such as plaintiffs whose interest
in the land was vested before the judgment and the judgment specifically excluded such interest from the effect of the judgment.
v) Additional grounds of appeal to be filed upon receipt of the record
of appeal. See: pp 489-480 roa.
By this appeal, the plaintiffs/appellants seek from this court the reversal of the judgment of the trial court. So far as the records go, no further or additional grounds of appeal have been filed prior to the hearing of this appeal. In considering this appeal, the designation of the parties shall be maintained. That is to say, the plaintiffs/appellants shall be referred to simply as the plaintiffs and the defendants/respondents, the defendants.
The suit:
The plaintiffs suing as joint administrators of the estate of the late Phebe Amasah on 10/10/2008, caused to be issued in the registry of the lower court, a writ of summons endorsed with the judicial reliefs listed hereunder, against the defendants:
1. Declaration of title to the land described in the statement of
claim.
2. Perpetual injunction.
3. Damages for trespass, and
4. Recovery of possession.
In paragraph 2 of the statement of claim [pp 3-4 roa], the plaintiffs pleaded that the deceased died possessed of a land as owner, being at Adjiringano Accra bounded on the north west by proposed road measuring 600 feet more o