SAMUEL KODWO DARKO v. NANA AGYAKUMA APRAKU
2021
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
- MARGARET WELBOURNE, JA –PRESIDING
- JENNIFER A. DODOO, JA
- GEORGE KOOMSON, JA
Areas of Law
- Property and Real Estate Law
- Contract Law
- Evidence Law
- Civil Procedure
2021
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
This appeal concerns a sublease dispute over land at Airport West Residential Area, Accra, Ghana, initially leased by the Appellant from the Lands Commission in 1991. The Respondent paid substantial sums from 1993 to 1995 for an uncompleted building and associated land. The Appellant claimed the sublease was for 0.11 acres; the Respondent asserted it covered Plot 1A in its entirety and declined to sign a defective sublease document lacking Lands Commission consent and proper particulars. The High Court awarded specific performance, damages, and found the entire plot was conveyed. On rehearing, the Court of Appeal evaluated exhibits and testimonies, holding the contracted acreage was 0.25 acres, affirming breach, damages, and specific performance, directing procurement of Lands Commission consent, and denying forfeiture and recovery.
Introduction
The Plaintiff/Appellant (who will simply be referred to as the Appellant in this matter) issued a writ against the Defendant/Respondent (who will be simply referred to as the Respondent) claiming the following reliefs:
i. A declaration that the Defendant is in breach of the sub-lease agreement.
ii. An order of forfeiture of the sub-lease.
iii. An order for recovery of possession by the Plaintiff
iv. An order of interlocutory injunction against the Defendant, her agents, successors, assigns, workmen and all manner of persons claiming through her from interfering with the quiet enjoyment of the land by the Plaintiff and his successors.
v. Damages for breach of contract.
vi. Costs.
It was the Appellant’s case as gleaned from his statement of claim that he is the lessor of a 0.40 acre of land situate at Airport Residential Area having obtained his lease from the Lands Commission in September 1991. Thereafter, he made a sublease of 0.11 acres to the Respondent in 1995. Although he executed his part of the sublease, the Respondent refused to execute her part. She has also refused to pay ground rent for her portion of the lease. He therefore claimed as per the endorsement on his writ.
The Respondent in response stated that she had purchased a sublease of plot No. 1A from the Appellant. Yet the Appellant had divided the plot into two and given her a portion of what she had paid for. As a result, she had refused to sign the sublease he had sent for signature. She therefore claimed that she had not failed, neglected or refused to sign the conveyance but rather it was the Appellant who had failed and/or neglected to effect the corrections to the sublease. She said she had fulfilled her part of the obligations by paying to the Appellant the sums of Ten Thousand Pounds Sterling (£10,000.00), Sixteen Thousand United States Dollars ($16,000.00) and One Million, Four Hundred Thousand Cedis (¢1,400,000.00) between September 1993 and August 1995. She accused the Appellant of fraud (see p 89 of the Record of Appeal {ROA}) particularizing same as:
a. The Plaintiff purports to make a grant of the unexpired term of 94 years from an undefined time to the Defendant, relying on a grant from the Lands Commission (Headlease) which grant was for a period of 89 years from the 1st day of November, 1990.
b. That the Plaintiff was not granted 94 years in the headlease for him to purport to make a grant of 94 years thereof.
c. The Plaintiff’s conveyance to the Def