(1) INTRODUCTION The plaintiff claimed against the defendant the following reliefs: -
(a) Declaration of title.
b) Recovery of possession.
c) An order to remove the temporary structures on the plaintiff’s land.
d) Damages for trespass.
The defendant denied liability for the claims of the plaintiff and at the close of pleadings the following issues were set down for determination by the court: -
(1) Whether or not the plaintiff is the owner of the land in dispute?
(2) Whether or not the land in dispute forms part of the larger Nii Adu Commey land with land certificate no. GA9339?
(3) Whether or not the defendant is a trespasser?
(4) Whether or not the defendant’s father acquired the land in dispute from the Sempe Stool in 1995? (5) Any other issues arising out of the pleadings.
PLAINTIFF’S CASE The plaintiff’s case is that she acquired the piece of land, which is the subject matter of this suit, from the Nii Adu Commey family of Glefe by a lease dated the 31st of August 2017. The plaintiff gave the size of the land which is situate at Glefe as 0. 192 acre or 0. 078 hectare and stated that she acquired the land for development but the defendant had placed temporary structures on the land and had refused to vacate the land.
The plaintiff also stated that her land forms part of a larger parcel of land which belongs to her grantor and that her grantor holds a certificate of title over the whole large tract of land.
It was also the case of the plaintiff that her grantor had made several attempts to evict the defendant from the land but all to no avail and that it is only an order of the court that will compel the defendant to vacate the land.
DEFENDANT’S CASE The defendant claimed that the land in dispute was originally acquired by his father who is now deceased and that his father acquired it in the year 1995 from one Nii Kpakpo Amako II who was the Mankralo of the Sempe Stool.
According to the defendant when his father acquired the land from the Sempe Stool, he took possession of it and commenced the building of structure on it.
The plaintiff says his father died in the 2006 and thereafter his father’s properties including the land in dispute were passed onto him (defendant). The defendant claimed that his father built an uncompleted structure on the land which he, defendant, completed in the year 2001. It was also the case of the defendant that the land in dispute cannot be part of land owned by Nii Adu Commey family as the land of the said fam
