TRUE FAITH CHURCH VS TRUE FAITH EVANG. CHURCH & ANOR
2024
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
- HER LADYSHIP JUSTICE CYNTHIA MARTINSON (MRS)
Areas of Law
- Civil Procedure
- Property and Real Estate Law
- Evidence Law
2024
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
This case arose from an Interpleader action where True Faith Church Ghana sought recovery of properties from True Faith Evangelical Church. Following a consent judgment in favor of True Faith Church Ghana, declaring their title to the properties, the Claimant filed a notice asserting ownership of property located at Plot No. 20A Block 'AB' Tatafroso-Extension Dadease near Mampong. The court had to determine the rightful ownership of the property and resolve issues on the validity of execution and damages. It ruled that the musical instruments and chairs belong to the Claimant and must be returned, but dismissed the Claimant’s ownership claim to the church building. The case involved significant issues of possession, the burden of proof, allegations of fraud, and the legitimacy of judicial execution processes.
This is an Interpleader action under Order 44 R 12 of CI 47 of the High Court Civil Procedure Rules.
Background of this Interpleader Action: On the 15th of December 2015, the plaintiff in the substantive case True Faith Church Ghana issued a Writ in this court seeking for recovery of over 75 branches therein described as branches mentioned in paragraph 10 of the plaintiff’s statement of claim from the Defendant in the substantive case, known as True Faith Evangelical Church.
On the 21st Day of July 2017 consent Judgement was entered in favour of the plaintiff in the substantive case by this court differently constituted, declaring title to the branches listed in paragraph 10 of the plaintiff’s [judgement creditor herein] statement of claim in the substantive case.
The judgment against the defendant [judgement debtor herein] in the substantive case was entered 2/10/17 and subsequently, an amended entry of judgment was also entered on the 8th of November 2017. The plaintiff in the substantive case with the support of the police and court bailiffs went around collecting keys and properties as declared by the consent judgment from the defendant in the substantive case in the process of enforcing the consent judgment.
Subsequently, on the 31/1/2022 the Claimant filed Notice of Claim under Order 44 Rule 12 of CI 47, claiming title to building/structure and content situate, lying at Tatrafoso Mampong being the subject maꢀer of the aꢀachment and same was served on the judgement Creditor on the 31/ 1/2022. The Deputy Sheriff served a notice to Admit or Dispute the claim on the judgment creditor on the 28th of April 2022 as required by the Rules.
The judgment creditor then filed a notice to dispute the claim under Order 44 R 12[2] of CI 47. The interpleader summons was therefore forwarded to the court under Order 44 Rule [12] 4 for the determination.
Following the interpleader action between the claimant and judgment creditor and considering their averments the court decided to try the action under Order 44 Rule 13[b]. In this interpleader action under Order 44 R 13 [b] CI 47. The court reached a consensus with the parties that based on the issues at stake the Claimant will be designated the plaintiff and the judgment/creditor will be designated as the defendant.
In this judgement, the claimant is [herein after referred to as Plaintiff] Plaintiff/claimant when the need arises.
The Judgement creditor is [hereinafter referred to as the Defendant]but also as