GHANATTA vs. BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF NICHIREN SHOSHU SOKAGAKKAI OF GHANA [1994]DLCA749

Date	1994-07-28
Suit No.
Citation No.	[1994]DLCA749

OFORI-BOATENG JA

ADJABENG JA

LUTTERODT JA

W A N ADUMA-BOSSMAN FOR THE APPELLANT.

LARRY OTOO (WITH HIM W FUGAR) FOR THE RESPONDENTS.

[1994]DLCA749
																																						<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">GHANATTA<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">BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF NICHIREN SHOSHU SOKAGAKKAI OF GHANA<o:p></o:p>[COURT OF APPEAL, ACCRA]<o:p></o:p>[1993-94] 1 GLR 316<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>COUNSEL:<o:p></o:p>W A N ADUMA-BOSSMAN FOR THE APPELLANT.<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">

LARRY OTOO (WITH HIM W FUGAR) FOR THE RESPONDENTS. <o:p></o:p>

OFORI-BOATENG, ADJABENG AND LUTTERODT JJA<o:p></o:p>

</div>JUDGMENT OF ADJABENG JA.<o:p></o:p>On 14th October 1992 the plaintiff-respondents (hereinafter
referred to as the respondents) took action against the first
defendant-appellant (hereinafter referred to as the appellant) and one other at
the High Court, Accra. The respondents by their writ of summons claimed the
following 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:l0 level1 lfo1;
border:none;mso-padding-alt:31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt;mso-border-shadow:yes">(1). “A declaration of title of
plots No 86 and 87 Amissa Gon, Dansoman, Accra together with all the buildings
thereon and on which the kaikan (center for worship) of the plaintiff is
situated. <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:l0 level1 lfo1;
border:none;mso-padding-alt:31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt;mso-border-shadow:yes">(2). Recovery of possession of the
disputed property. <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:l0 level1 lfo1;
border:none;mso-padding-alt:31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt;mso-border-shadow:yes">(3). Recall and cancellation of any
documents affecting the land, prepared by the second defendant purporting to
vest the property in the first defendant or any other person or persons. <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:l0 level1 lfo1;border:none;mso-padding-alt:31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt;
mso-border-shadow:yes">(4).
An order of perpetual injunction restraining the first defendant,
his agents, servants, workmen or assigns or any associations or bodies formed
by him from in any way interfering with the property in dispute.”<o:p></o:p>In a statement of claim subsequently filed by the respondents,
they averred that the respondents, a religious body, were originally established
averred that the respondents, a religious body, were originally established
under the name Nichiren Shoshu of Ghana in 1968 as a bench of the Soka Gakkai
organisation in Ghana. This organisation was registered in 1975 under the
Trustees Act, 1962 (Act 106) and in 1977 acquired the property now in dispute
for the purpose of building thereon their place of worship known as the
“kaikan.” The name of the organisation was in 1989 changed from Nichiren Shoshu
of Ghana to Nichiren Shoshu Sokagakkai of Ghana and was re-registered a such
under the Religious Bodies (Registration) Law, 1989 (PNDCL 221). The
respondents averred that owing to some leadership changes which were made in
April 1990, before the registration under PNDCL 221,a few members of the organisation,
led by the first defendant-appellant herein, decided to disrupt the activities
of the organisation. That even though the respondents had requested the second
defendants, the original owners of the land, to prepare the documents on the
land in the new name of the respondents, they rather chose to do so in the old
name of the organisation and released the same to the appellant and his
breakaway group. The respondents therefore contended in paragraphs (27), (28)
and (29) of their statement of claim as follows:<o:p></o:p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt;
margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;border:none;mso-padding-alt:
31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt;mso-border-shadow:yes">“(27) The first defendant and his group are not yet registered and
they do not constitute the old group to claim any title to the property. <o:p></o:p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt;
margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;border:none;mso-padding-alt:
31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt;mso-border-shadow:yes">(28) The plaintiffs will contend that the conduct of the second
defendant is wrong, unlawful and constitutes a fraud on the plaintiffs. <o:p></o</main>