RICHARD KWAME BANNI v. ISAAC ACQUAYE PAPPOE & ANOTHER
2021
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
- KWOFIE, JA (PRESIDING)
- OBENG-MANU JNR, JA
- KOOMSON, JA
Areas of Law
- Civil Procedure
- Property and Real Estate Law
2021
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
GEORGE K. Koomson JA, writing for a unanimous Court of Appeal panel with Henry Kwofie JA presiding and Obeng‑Manu Jnr JA concurring, dismissed an interlocutory appeal from the Circuit Court, Amasaman. The 1st Defendant/Appellant had sought to set aside the Plaintiff/Respondent’s writ and statement of claim, contending that the disputed land’s value—based on a unilateral valuation including a carpentry workshop and uncompleted showrooms (USD 60,200; GH¢329,000)—exceeded the Circuit Court’s monetary jurisdiction. The trial judge ruled that the Circuit Court’s jurisdiction in land disputes is not limited in monetary terms and dismissed the application. On appeal, Koomson JA held that section 42 of the Courts Act, 1993 (Act 459) as amended by Act 620, not section 41, governs civil jurisdiction; section 42(1)(a)(iii) contains no monetary ceiling for causes involving ownership, possession, occupation or title to land, and subsection 42(3) applies only where a value is specified. He further emphasized that under section 42(2) the court, not a party, must call evidence on value. The appeal—including the “weight of evidence” ground—failed.
KOOMSON JA:
This is an interlocutory appeal from the ruling of the Circuit Court, Amasaman dated 17th December, 2019. In the said ruling, the trial Circuit Judge dismissed the Defendant/Appellant’s motion praying for an order to set aside the Plaintiff/Respondent’s writ of summons and statement of claim on the ground that the value of the subject- matter of Plaintiff/Respondent’s writ of summons is in excess of the monetary jurisdiction of the court below.
In this judgment, the 1st Defendant/Appellant shall be referred to as “the 1st Defendant” and the Plaintiff/Respondent also referred to as “the Plaintiff.
By a writ of summons and a statement of claim dated 18th July, 2019, the Plaintiff claimed against the Defendants the following reliefs:
a. Declaration of title to the land described in paragraph 4 of the statement of claim.
b. Recovery of possession
c. Damages for trespass.
d. Perpetual injunction restraining Defendants from interfering with the peaceful enjoyment of Plaintiff’s land by themselves, their agents, privies, assigns, workmen, etc.
e. Cost
On the same date, the plaintiff filed on Application for interlocutory injunction. On 31st July, 2019, the 1st Defendant entered a Conditional Appearance through his lawyer. The 2nd Defendant also entered appearance through its lawyer on 2nd August, 2019 and filed s statement of defence on 9th August, 2019. The 2nd Defendant filed an affidavit in opposition to the injunction application on 12th September, 2019. On 16th September, 2019, the 1st Defendant filed a statement of defence and an affidavit in opposition to the application for injunction. On the 29th October, 2019 the 1st Defendant then filed an application for an order to set aside the Plaintiff’s writ of summons and statement of claim on the ground that the value of the land the subject – matter of the Plaintiff’s writ of summons is in excess of the monetary jurisdiction of the Circuit Court. This application was resisted by the Plaintiff.
In his affidavit in support, the 1st Defendant deposed that he engaged the services of an expert surveyor to value the land in dispute together with his carpentry workshop and (2) two-storey uncompleted showrooms structure on the land. The 1st Defendant deposed further that the value of the land was USD 60,200.00 with its cedi equivalent stated as GH¢329,000.00. The Plaintiff opposed the 1st Defendant’s application on the ground that his claim was for the above land and not the structures on the lan