THOMAS MINKAH v. JAMES OPOKU BAAH & ORS

JUDGMENT

The Plaintiff herein caused an interpleader application to be filed on his behalf when the Defendant herein caused the property in dispute to be attached in execution of a judgment obtained against one James Opoku Baah at the Commercial Court, Kumasi. The Defendant filed a notice to dispute the Plaintiff’s title under Order 44 rule 12 (2) of the High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules 2004, C.I. 47.

A notice was subsequently served on both parties for the issue of the Plaintiff’s title to the disputed property which has been variously described as H/N0. 18 Block NW 6022 Street, Breman and H/N0. Plot 30 Block C, Breman, to be determined.

At the trial, the Plaintiff narrated the history behind his acquisition of the said property as follows: He bought the disputed property which had been built up to the lintel level from one Ama Serwaa in the year 1999 for nine (9) million Cedis as per the document of transfer tendered as exhibit A, allocation note and site plan (exhibits B and B1). The Plaintiff continued the construction, roofed the same and was living in this house.

Whilst working with Nana Opoku Baah, the Plaintiff encountered financial difficulties as a result of which he sold this property to Nana Opoku Baah. The Plaintiff transferred this house to Opoku Baah and this was evidenced by a document of conveyance dated 2002 (exhibit C). This transfer was done in the year 2002. Mr. Opoku Baah also run into a debt, collected various sums of money from the Plaintiff and eventually sold the house back to the Plaintiff. This time round, the deed of conveyance (exhibit D) was prepared by one Lawyer Dapaa who is now a High Court Judge. He explained that Breman stool lands are first sold by families who then take the purchaser to the Bremanhene for a proper allocation paper to be issued. That accounts for the two allocation papers in respect of the plot in issue (exhibit E and E1).

When Nana Opoku Baah sold the house back to the Plaintiff, he could not trace the documents which the Plaintiff had given to him earlier on. This necessitated the preparation of exhibit D by Lawyer Dapaa. Out of the blue, the Plaintiff saw a notice of attachment which had been posted on this house. Upon enquiries, he was informed that Nana Opoku Baah had used this house to secure monies taken from Thomas Minkah. All this while, Opoku Baah lived in this house. In cross examination, the Plaintiff denied that this property initially belonged to their partnership. He said this prop