JIBRIL MAHAMA vs. AKWASI MENSAH

The plaintiff/appellant sued over a land sale transaction, claiming declaratory reliefs, specific performance, perpetual injunction, and recovery of possession in respect of land at Dome Pillar 2 Transformer Junction. In his statement of claim, he pleaded that under the sale agreement he was to pay GH₵40,000 immediately and the balance of GH₵30,000 after transfer of the land documents. The defendant’s original defence stated that the land was to be sold for GH₵70,000, that GH₵40,000 had been paid, and that the balance of GH₵30,000 was to be paid after transfer of the documents. Relying on this pleading, the plaintiff applied for judgment on admissions under Order 23 rule 6(1) and Order 11 rule 18(1)(a) of C.I. 47. Before that application was heard, the defendant attempted to amend his defence; the first amended defence was struck out for failure to obtain leave, after which he formally applied for leave to amend. The plaintiff opposed the amendment, arguing that his earlier application for judgment on admissions should first be heard and that the amendment was intended to defeat it. This summary is drawn from the opening portion of Torkornoo JSC’s judgment beginning: “The Plaintiff/Appellant/Appellant Plaintiff is contesting the leave granted by the High Court...” and from Marful-Sau JSC’s recital of the endorsed reliefs and pleadings.

JUDGMENT BY TORKORNOO, (MRS.) JSC:- The Plaintiff/Appellant/Appellant (Plaintiff) is contesting the leave granted by the High Court to the Defendant/Respondent/Respondent (Defendant) to amend his defence to the Plaintiff’s action. In his Statement of Claim, the Plaintiff had averred in his paragraph 4 that 4. Plaintiff avers that it was a term of the sale and purchase agreement he entered into with defendant that he was to pay GH₵40,000 to the defendant whilst the remaining balance of GH₵30,000 ‘shall be paid after the transfer’ of the necessary land documents’ In his original defence to the Plaintiff’s claims, the Defendant had denied all averments in the Statement of Claim and pleaded in Paragraph 4 of his Statement of Defence that 4. In further denial, the defendant will contend that the said plot of land was to be sold to the plaintiff for Gh₵70,000 and the plaintiff paid GH₵40,000 leaving a balance of 30,000 to be paid after the transfer of the documen...