SAMUEL DOUGLAS LANQUAYE LAMPTEY v. MOGYABI YEDOM LTD & 16 OTHERS
April 23, 2009
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
- HIS LORDSHIP MR. JUSTICE S.H. OCRAN
Areas of Law
- Civil Procedure
- Property and Real Estate Law
- Evidence Law
- Corporate Law
April 23, 2009
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
At the Ghana High Court, His Lordship Mr. Justice S.H. Ocran dismissed the land claims of Samuel Douglas Lanquaye Lamptey, who sued Mogyabi Yedom Limited and individuals including the 6th and 9th defendants for declarations of title, injunction, breach of lease, and trespass. Multiple writs had been filed under the same suit number, but the court ruled that an amended writ filed on 19 October 2005 without leave was void, leaving the 9 May 2005 writ as the operative pleading. Substituted service was defective, and crucially, the 1st defendant company was never properly served. On the merits, exhibits showed ownership by named individuals rather than the Nii Anoi Lantey family, so the plaintiff lacked capacity to recover land for the family. Further, undeniable evidence established that the 6th and 9th defendants had occupied and developed the land since 1986, rendering the claims time-barred under section 10 of the Limitation Decree and supporting adverse possession under GHICOC v Hanna Assi. Registered conveyance (exhibit B) carried presumptions of regularity and ownership; no court had set it aside. The court granted the 9th defendant’s counterclaim for declaration and injunction, and awarded costs.
The Plaintiff by his amended writ dated 19th October 2005 claimed against the defendants jointly and severally the following
A declaration of title of the land described in the schedule attached to the statement of claim.
A further declaration that the 1st defendant has breached the leased agreement between plaintiff.
Perpetual injunction restraining the defendants their agents servants and assigns from interfering with plaintiffs land.
Damages for trespass.
On 11th November 2008, the plaintiff filed an amended statement of claim leave of which was granted on 10th November 2008 to amend the claim by adding a new paragraph which was captured in paragraph 6 of the affidavit in support of the application for leave to amend the statement of claim. By that amendment a new paragraph numbered as paragraph 8 was added.
The amended writ referred to was filed on 19th October 2005 without leave of the court.
At the time that it was filed, two other writs with the same suit number BL261/2005 had been filed on 17-2-05 and on 9-5-05,
The one filed on 17-2-05 was headed as follows
NII ANOI LANTEY FAMILY AKOTO LANTEY ACCRA
VRS
1. MOGYABI YEDOM LIMTED
2. AUNTIE MERLEY
3. CHALES TINKORA
4. MATILDA APAW
5. MR, DOUDU
6. MR, YERENKYI
7. AUNTIE ATAAH
8. AKOTO BAMFO
It was accompanied by a statement of claim headed
NII ANOI LANTEY FAMILY
VRS
MOGYABIYEDOM LTD & 15 ORS
In the statement of claim, the plaintiffs were not named and no explanation was given as to how the defendants are eight in the writ but 16 in the statement of claim.
The writ filed on 9-5-05 was headed as follows
SAMUEL DOUGLAS LANQUAYE LAMPTEY
VRS
MOGYABI YEDOM LIMITED
AUNTIE MARY
CHARLES TINKORA
MATILDA APAW
MR DOUDU
MR. YEREKYI
AUNTIE ATAAH
AKOTO BAMFO
No statement of claim was attached to this writ dated 9-5-05
Since no statement of defence had than been filed, this writ may be considered as amended writ of summons, effected without leave of the court as pleadings had then not closed.
The endorsement on this writ was as follows
1. A declaration of title to land described in the statement of claim.
2. A further declaration that 1st defendant has breached the lease agreement between it and plaintiff.
3. Perpetual injunction restraining the defendants, their agents, servants and assigns from interfering with the land.
In this writ filed on 9th May 2005, there was no claim for damages.
Even though no indication has been given in the statement of claim as to the p