[1987]DLHC2228 • August 19, 1987 • High Court
DARKO vs. IMADI
The plaintiff sought recovery of possession of house No. D733/4, Kojo Thompson Road, Tudu, Accra, from the defendant, who was a tenant occupying the first floor and part of the ground floor (a wooden structure) of the house. The defendant acknowledged the plaintiff as landlord but contested the claim on grounds including non-compliance with statutory rent laws and disputed the extent of his tenancy. The plaintiff had purchased the house intending to occupy it personally, having given notice to quit to the defendant.
read moreThe plaintiff’s claim in this action is for recovery of possession of house No. D733/4, Kojo Thompson Road, Tudu, Accra. The defendant does not deny that the plaintiff is his landlord. He however contends that the plaintiff does not need the house for his occupation. In a subsequent amendment to his defence the defendant contended that: “The plaintiff’s action is incompetent and cannot be maintained in law since the plaintiff has not complied with the statutory requirements under the Rent Act, 1963 (Act 220), the Rent Regulations, 1964 (L.I. 369) and the Rent Control Law, 1982 (P.N.D.C.L. 5).” From the pleadings, therefore, the following main issues arose for determination: (1). whether or not the action is maintainable in law; (2). whether the plaintiff has given the defendant notice to quit; (3). whether the plaintiff needs the house for his occupation; and (4). whether the defendant will suffer greater hardship if an order for possession is made. In his counsel’s ad...