PAA KOW ASAMOAH ARTHUR VS JOSEPH HENRY FYNN & ORS

By his writ of summons filed on 22nd January 2021, the plaintiff’s claims against the defendants are for the following reliefs:

“a. Declaration of title to all that parcel of land described as Plot No. 13 at Ngyiresia-Essipon-Mpintsin measuring 2. 8 acres.

b. Recovery of possession.

c. Damages for trespass.

d. An order of perpetual injunction restraining the Defendants, their agents, workmen, assigns and all persons claiming through the Defendants from committing any further trespass on the Plaintiff’s land”. The plaintiff claims to bring this action for himself and on behalf of the children of his late father, Commander Samuel Asamoah Arthur.

According to him, in 2004, his late father acquired the disputed land from the Abankyiwa Abiradze family of Ngyirasia-Shama through its head, Ebusuapanyin Anthony Effrim.

The transaction was evidenced by a lease agreement duly signed by ebusuapanyin Effrim, and the lease agreement was registered at the Lands Department.

After the registration, his late father commenced a four-bedroom structure on a portion of the land but could not complete it until he died in 2018. He was in the United Kingdom when his father died.

When he visited Ghana for his father's funeral, he saw that the defendants were developing portions of the land without his consent hence the present action against them.

The defendants have not denied putting up structures on the disputed land.

According to them, they lawfully acquired the disputed land from the Abankyiwa Abiradze family of Ngyirasia.

They contend that the plaintiff’s father has no interest in the disputed land as he did not pay for the cost of the land nor register the disputed plots.

The following issues were adopted for resolution: i. Whether or not the plaintiff’s father legally acquired the disputed land from the Abankyiwa Ebiradze family of Ngyiresia.

Whether or not the defendants have trespassed onto the plaintiff’s land and developed same.

Any other issues arising from the pleadings and evidence.

The defendants failed to testify despite the opportunity given to them to do so.

Therefore, this case is one-sided, consisting only of the plaintiff's evidence and his witness.

Notwithstanding the failure on the defendants’ part to testify, the plaintiff who seeks a declaration of title to land has to lead evidence in proof of his title.

Such evidence must satisfy the only standard of proof required in civil suits, which is proof on the preponderance of probabilities.