THEOPHILIA ACHEAMPONG v. SOS GHANA

JUDGMENT

Such is the trouble as in this case when a guardian and her “child’ of forty-two years relationship mount the litigation arena to face each other. The invitation for the contest was initiated by the Plaintiff barely a year ago and the Defendant accepted the challenge with a view to proving to the Plaintiff that it does not pay to tell the one carrying you at his back that he stinks. The facts simply are that the Plaintiff was among the pioneer inmates of SOS, Ghana admitted at their village at the age of ten (10) in 1974. She left the Village when she married. She was later accommodated at the Village, where she stayed for a long time with her husband and children. Recently, when the Plaintiff’s daughter began renovation/extension works on the building, the Defendant razed everything down. The Plaintiff contends that the building was built and gifted to her, but the Defendant claimed otherwise.

The endorsement contained in the plaintiff’s writ of summons was:

a. A declaration of title to the property located at Community 6, Tema in the area known as S.O.S. Village,

b. A declaration that the demolition carried out by the Defendant was unlawful,

c. Damages for the unlawful demolition of Plaintiff’s property.

d. Perpetual injunction restraining the Defendant, his agents, assigns and privies from in any way interfering in the use of Plaintiff’s property, situate and lying at Community 6, Tema known as S.O.S. Village.

The Writ of Summons was accompanied by a 15-paragraph statement of claim. The defendant’s Statement of Defence did not include a counterclaim, but it was determined to do battle with the poor Plaintiff. An African proverb says: “A goat’s frown cannot stop it from being taken to the market.” After pleadings, the underneath issues filed by the counsel for the parties were adopted by the court.

a. Whether or not one Handel, who was the one time village coordinator informed the plaintiff a village child then that he would build a residential accommodation for her and did instruct the then father of the village Mr. Owoo to look for a residential plot for the construction of the said house.

b. Whether or not the said Mr. Owoo informed Mr. Handel that there were some vacant lands at the village as a result of which Mr. Handel directed that a house be built for the Plaintiff on the said land.

c. Whether or not the Plaintiff since 1989 has been in quiet and undisturbed possession of the property and has also exercised acts of ownership o