AMEGASHIE vs. OKINE [1991]DLHC1959

Date	1991-09-24
Suit No.
Citation No.	[1991]DLHC1959

LUTTERODT J.

S. A. X. TSEGAH FOR THE PLAINTIFF.

GEORGE THOMPSON FOR THE DEFENDANT.

[1991]DLHC1959
																																						<div class="restriction-wrapper">
														<div class="container-lg">
															<div class="row">
																<div class="col-md-12 restricted-content">
																	<div class="restricted-content-img-wrapper">
																		<div class="lock-icon bounce-7">
																			<img class=""
																				src="https://www.dennislawgh.com/dl-assets/dl-images/lock-content.png"
																				alt="Subscription based content">
																		</div>
																	</div>
																	 
																		<a href="https://www.dennislawgh.com/login"
																		class="btn btn-primary btn-lg"
																		style="font-family: 'open sans'; text-transform: capitalize; border-radius: 8px"> 
																		Login to Read Full Case </a>
																	 
																	
																</div>
															</div>
														</div>
													</div>
													<main id="main" class="content" style="min-height: 60rem" ><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;
mso-fareast-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;
color:#00B0F0">AMEGASHIE<o:p></o:p><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;
mso-fareast-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;
color:#00B0F0">vs. <o:p></o:p><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;
mso-fareast-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;
color:#00B0F0">OKINE<o:p></o:p>[HIGH COURT, ACCRA]<o:p></o:p>[1992] 2 GLR 319<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">

<p class="MsoNormal" align="right" style="margin-bottom:5.0pt;text-align:right;
mso-pagination:none;border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in;mso-padding-alt:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">Date: 24
SEPTEMBER 1991<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:<o:p></o:p>S. A. X. TSEGAH FOR THE PLAINTIFF.<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">

GEORGE THOMPSON FOR THE DEFENDANT. <o:p></o:p>

</div>CORAM: <o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">

</div>JUDGMENT OF LUTTERODT J.<o:p></o:p>Under the Land Title Registration Laws 1985 (P.N.D.C.L. 152) the
contestants to title in any piece of land are first obliged to refer their
dispute to the Lands Registry for adjudication by the Land Title Adjudication
Committee.<o:p></o:p>Therefore, the plaintiff and the defendant who were involved in a dispute
over a parcel of land situate and lying at Abelenkpe duly referred their case
to the relevant body for adjudication. Each is said to have submitted her
relevant documents.<o:p></o:p>The plaintiff, who alleges she was declared the registered
proprietress of the said land by the Chief Registrar of Lands and was duly
issued with land certificate No. GAO 542 dated 7 August 1990 sued the defendant
(1) to recover that piece of land; (2) for an order of interim injunction to
restrain him from further trespassing onto the land; and (3) for damages for
trespass.<o:p></o:p>It is the plaintiff’s contention that she has been compelled to
adopt this line of action because in spite of the fact that she has an
indefeasible title (certificate), the defendant has refused to yield up possession
of the land.<o:p></o:p>When the defendant was served with the statement of claim, she did
not merely file a defence but also counterclaimed for two reliefs:<o:p></o:p><p class="MsoNormalCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left:.75in;mso-add-space:auto;
text-align:justify;text-indent:-.25in;mso-pagination:none;mso-list:l2 level1 lfo2;
border:none;mso-padding-alt:31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt;mso-border-shadow:yes">(1). An order that the purported
grant of the land described in paragraph (7) of the claim by the Swaniker
family to the plaintiff is null and void. <o:p></o:p><p class="MsoNormalCxSpMiddle" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:
5.0pt;margin-left:.75in;mso-add-space:auto;text-align:justify;text-indent:-.25in;
mso-pagination:none;mso-list:l2 level1 lfo2;border:none;mso-padding-alt:31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt;
mso-border-shadow:yes">(2).
A declaration that the certificate of title issued by the Land
Title Registry to the plaintiff is null and void and of no effect.”<o:p></o:p>Among the steps the defendant took thereafter was to file a motion
for interim injunction restraining both parties, their servants and agents from
interfering with the physical features of the disputed land or in any way
dealing with it until the hearing and final determination of this suit.<o:p></o:p>At the hearing of the motion the plaintiff’s counsel took a
preliminary objection in law the substance of which was that the entire
proceeding was not maintainable at law in so far as it sins against section 132
(2) of P.N.D.C.L. 152. His argument therefore was that the application for
interim injunction was not only frivolous but without jurisdiction and the same
ought to be dismissed in limine. The objection did not come as a surprise, for
the plaintiff’s counsel has carefully and clearly spelt out all the grounds on
which he intended to oppose the motion, including the main ground which I have
already outlined. The other grounds he argued in support of his main argument
are contained in paragraphs (8), (9) and (10). By them he urged the following
important points:<o:p></o:p><ol style="margin-top:0in" start="1" type="1">
 <li class="MsoNormalCxSpMiddle" style="text-align: justify; border: none;"><span style="font-size:
 12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;mso-fareast-font-family:
 &quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;">The defendant has not
 appealed against the decision of the adjudication committee in accordance
 with section 131 (2) of P.N.D.C.L. 152.<o:p></o:p></li>
 <li class="MsoNormalCxSpMiddle" style="text-align: justify; border: none;"><span style="font-size:
 12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;mso-fareast-font-family:
 &quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;">The High Court has not
 granted the cancellation of the said certificate in accordance with
 section 122 of P.N.D.C.L. 152.<o:p></o:p></li>
 <li class="MsoNormalCxSpMiddle" style="</main>