NUNGUA STOOL VS ISAADA ROOFING TILES LTD. & ANOR

In this consolidated suits, the Plaintiffs by their Amended Writ of Summons claimed the following reliefs against Defendants in both suits: (a). Declaration of title to the land particularly described in paragraph 1 of the Amended Statement of Claim(b). An order to cancel the lease or purported lease agreement between 1st and 2nd defendant(c). Recovery of possession(d). Perpetual injunction to restrain the Defendants whether by themselves their servants agents workmen assigns or whomsoever from interfering with the plaintiffs’ ownership, occupation and possession of the land(e). Damages for trespass.

The 1st Defendant in both suits per its Amended Statement of Defence counterclaimed as follows: a) A declaration of title to all that piece or parcel of land known as plot No. LI 57 containing an approximate area of 2. 56 acres situate at the Tema Motorway Industrial Area Extension within the City of Accra in the Greater Accra Region of the Republic of Ghana and bounded on the North-East by Plot No. LI 58; on the South-East by a proposed road; on the South- West by Plot No. LI 56 and on the North-West by State land b) Perpetual injunction restraining the 1st and 2nd Plaintiffs their agents assigns and workmen from ever dealing with the land in dispute in a manner detrimental to the interest of the 1stdefendant c) Recovery of possession of the said land trespassed unto and an order that any offending structures be removed d) Damages for trespass.

At the request of 1st Plaintiff in Suit No. SOL/55/2010 coupled with agreement of all the lawyers for the parties, the Court made an order dated 2nd February 2017 for a composite plan to be made by the Regional Director of the Survey and Mapping Division of the Lands Commission, Accra so as to determine whether or not the Plaintiffs’ land falls outside the land acquired by the government under the Statutory Way Leaves Instruments, E. I. 46 and E. I. 44 of 1973. Not only was the composite plan drawn up as ordered but a report was also prepared.

Both the report and the composite plan were duly tendered in evidence as Exhibits CE1 and CE2 respectively.

As practice required, the surveyor who tendered Exhibits CE1 and CE2 was extensively cross-examined by the lawyers of the parties.

After careful evaluation of the evidence on the report and the composite plan, Exhibits CE1 and CE2, as well as the cross-examination, the Court on the 19th December 2017 ruled that the 1st plaintiff’s land in both cases falls within the la