SAHEL SAHARA BANK (BSIC LTD.) vs NANA FRED COMPANY & ANOTHER

Per a Notice of Claim filed on 13th April 2022, Claimant declared his interest in the property, House No. C5, Oyarifa, Accra in the Greater Accra Region which has been attached in execution of the judgment of this Court.

In the Notice of Dispute filed on 25th April 2022, the Plaintiff Judgment Creditor disputed Claimant’s interest in the said attached property.

In the Affidavit of Interest filed on 15th July 2022, Claimant claimed that he is the owner of the attached property. That he leased the land on which the property is situated from Reverend Christopher Sowah Okpoti and Others on 20th November 2009, which he developed into an estate for rentals and sales to interested persons.

He attached an Indenture and a Site Plan in respect of the parcel of land as Exhibit ENA.

That the 2nd Defendant Judgment Debtor only lived on the attached property as a tenant and has long vacated the said property.

According to Claimant, he never assigned his interest in the said property to any of the Defendant Judgment Debtors to warrant its attachment in execution of the judgment of the Court against them.

That because the 2nd Defendant Judgment Debtor does not own the attached property, it cannot be sold in satisfaction of any judgment debt he owes.

That for this reason, the attached property be released from attachment.

THE AFFIDAVIT OF DISPUTE

According to the Plaintiff Judgment Creditor, Claimant is not the owner of the attached property.

That Claimant claimed to be of Kumsark Estates Limited, Ayimensah, Accra.

That after the attachment of the property, the said Kumsark Estates Limited filed a Notice of Claim in respect of the same property which was dismissed by this Court on 1st November 2021; attached thereto are Exhibit 1; the Notice of Claim and Exhibit 2; the ruling of the Court on the said date.

That this Court then proceeded to bar Claimant at the time (Kumsark Estates Limited) and all who claim the property from making any claim to the said property.

That Claimant herein being mindful of the fact that the attached property had passed unto 2nd Defendant Judgment Debtor failed at the first instant to contest the sale as well as processes that were posted on the attached property.

That Claimant herein is therefore estopped from laying claim to the attached property because he stood by when Kumsark Estates Limited was making a claim to the said property.

That 2nd Defendant Judgment Debtor was never a tenant of the attached property. That the instant