SAMUEL ADJARTEY & EMMANUEL ADJARTEY & EMMANUEL O. ADJARTEY VS RICHARD ADJEI TAWIAH & THEODORE ADJEI &THEOPHILUS ADJEI ADJETEY
2016
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
- BARBARA TETTEH-CHARWAY (J)
Areas of Law
- Civil Procedure
- Property and Real Estate Law
2016
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
Plaintiffs, as estate administrators, sought a declaration of title, recovery of possession, damages for trespass, and an injunction against the defendants over disputed land. The deceased had acquired the land by deed of gift in 1964, and initially allowed the defendants' mother to operate a corn mill. Defendants later claimed the land and began building on it. Plaintiffs' warnings were ignored, leading to reporting to the Property Fraud Office and the high court suit. The defendants did not defend, resulting in an interlocutory judgment. Plaintiffs provided evidence proving their title to the land and the court ruled in favor of the plaintiffs, granting all the reliefs sought and awarding damages and costs.
Plaintiffs Samuel Adjartey, Emmanuel Adjartey and Emmanuel O. Adjartey, in their capacity as administrators of the estate of Frederick Djanmah Adjartey, hereafter referred to as the deceased, filed a suit in the high court against the defendants for the following reliefs; 1. Declaration of title to all that land situate at La, suburb of Accra and more specifically described in the schedule to this writ 2. Order for recovery of possession or ejectment of defendants from the land 3. Damages for trespass 4. Perpetual injunction restraining defendants by themselves, their agents, servants anyone whomsoever from interfering with plaintiff’s title, interest, right to the said land In their statement of claim, plaintiffs asserted that they were administrators of the estate of the deceased by virtue of having been granted letters of administration by the High Court on 27th June 2014. They further claimed that the deceased acquired the land in dispute, which was approximately 0. 15of an acre, in 1964 by a deed of gift from the Nmati –Drase Family of la.
After taking possession of the land, the deceased permitted defendants’ mother to operate a corn mill on a section of the land as he was not ready to build.
With the passage of time, defendants ceased to operate the corn mill but began to lay adverse claim to the land in dispute by allowing strangers to trade on the land without recourse to plaintiffs.
Furthermore defendants had dug a foundation in readiness to put up a two or three bedroom structure on the land.
Plaintiffs claimed that defendants had ignored their warnings and refused to relinquish control over the section of the land in their possession.
As a result, plaintiffs reported the matter to the Property Fraud Office of the Ghana Police service where they were advised to file a suit against defendants.
1st and 2nd defendants initially entered appearance through their lawyer, Francis Tachie –Menson.
However, on 29th February 2016, Counsel for 1st and2nd defendants withdrew his representation of his clients by filing a notice of withdrawal of solicitor.
Thereafter, 1st and 2nd defendants did not file any statement of defence.
Thus Counsel for plaintiff applied for and obtained interlocutory judgment against all three defendants.
Although defendants did not file any defence to the action the nature of reliefs sought by plaintiffs required that they adduce credible and sufficient evidence in order to succeed.
In the case of Agyei Osae & Others v Ad