Try asking the following...
JUDGMENT
Plaintiff’s claim By a writ of summons issued on 9th April 2019, the plaintiff claimed the following reliefs against the defendant: i. Declaration of title to all that piece or parcel of land described in the schedule to the statement of claim.
Damages for trespass.
Recovery of possession of any portion of land defendant has trespassed unto.
Perpetual injunction restraining the defendant, his assigns and workmen from ever dealing with plaintiff’s land.
It is the plaintiff’s case that she purchased the land in dispute from one Sackey Armah in the year 2014 and she was put in possession of the land.
She proceeded to construct a single building on the land and placed a caretaker on the land to take care of the land for him.
She was eventually given documents covering the land on 15th March 2018. The plaintiff asserts that when her grantor died, the defendant, who is a son of the deceased, entered the land and caused the arrest of her workmen who were working on the land.
The plaintiff asserts that she had bought building materials and deposited them on the land but the defendant has prevented her from working on the land and the building materials are being stolen.
It is the plaintiff’s case that the defendant would not stop his activities unless the court intervenes, hence the present action.
Procedural History The defendant entered appearance on 4th June 2019 through his lawyer Anthony Lartey of Lartey, Badombie & Co. (Winners Chambers). It must be placed on record that throughout the proceedings, Anthony Lartey still remained counsel on record as he did not, at any time, seek leave from the court to withdraw from the action.
The defendant however failed to file a defence to the action.
Counsel for the plaintiff therefore brought an application for judgment in default of defence against the defendant.
The court heard the application and entered interlocutory judgment on behalf of the plaintiff on 10th March 2020. The plaintiff was directed to file her witness statement in proof of her claim and this was duly done.
The plaintiff’s witness statements were duly served on counsel for the defendant but he failed to respond to the said processes.
On 12th June 2020, after the court had satisfied itself that the defendant had been duly notified of the proceedings, the court allowed the plaintiff to lead evidence in proof of her claim.
The suit was then initially adjourned to 18th June 2020 for judgment.
On 18th June 2020, the court’s attention was d