AGNES OSEI BONSU (PLAINTIFF) vs. S. K. KABUTEY AND NANA FRIMPONG (RESPONDENT) SAMUEL K. KABUTEY vs. MR. OSEI BONSU [2002]DLHC7429

AGNES OSEI BONSU (PLAINTIFF) vs. S. K. KABUTEY AND NANA FRIMPONG (RESPONDENT) SA... [2002]DLHC7429

Date	2002-12-11
Suit No.	SUIT NO 2228/88 & 2253/88 (CONSOLIDATED)
Citation No.	[2002]DLHC7429

HER LORDSHIP MRS AGNES M. DORDZIE J..

[2002]DLHC7429
																																						<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" >AGNES OSEI BONSU<o:p></o:p>(PLAINTIFF)<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>S. K. KABUTEY AND NANA FRIMPONG<o:p></o:p>(RESPONDENT)<o:p></o:p>SAMUEL K. KABUTEY<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>MR. OSEI BONSU<o:p></o:p>[HIGH COURT, ACCRA]<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="center" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;
text-align:center;line-height:115%;border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in;mso-padding-alt:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">SUIT
NO 2228/88 &amp; 2253/88 (CONSOLIDATED)&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;DATE: 11TH DECEMBER, 2002<o:p></o:p>

</div>CORAM:<o:p></o:p>HER
LORDSHIP MRS AGNES M. DORDZIE, J..<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border-top:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
border-left:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;border-right:none;
padding:1.0pt 0in 1.0pt 0in">

<p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;
text-align:center;line-height:115%;border:none;mso-border-top-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;padding:0in;mso-padding-alt:1.0pt 0in 1.0pt 0in">JUDGMENT<o:p></o:p>

</div>JUDGMENT IN SUIT NO
2228/88<o:p></o:p>The plaintiff in this suit
Mrs. Agnes Osei Bonsu claims against the defendants the following <o:p></o:p>1.
A declaration of title to a plot of land situate at East Legon known as plot no
613. In the alternative an order that the defendants pay her the value of the
uncompleted house she had built on the land. <o:p></o:p>2.
An order compelling the 2nd defendant to execute a deed of conveyance conveying
plot no 613 to her. <o:p></o:p>3.
An order of perpetual injunction restraining the defendants, their agents and
assigns from interfering with her presence on the land. <o:p></o:p>The plaintiff's case is
that she needed a plot of land to build a dwelling house on she therefore went
to the Lands Commission to ask for one. She requested to see the Regional Lands
Officer when she got to the offices of the Lands commission. She was led to the
2nd defendant Nana Frimpong, who represented to her that he was the Regional
Lands officer. She put her request for a plot of land to purchase before him.
He offered her plot No 613 East Legon to buy. The 2nd defendant made her
understand that the said plot of land was allocated to someone who breached the
terms of the lease by failing to develop the land. The Lands Commission
therefore had re-entered the land. In January 1985, she was shown the land and
asked to pay a fee of 200,000 cedis for the land. She paid and was given a
receipt. The 2nd defendant further gave her a letter of entry to start working
on the land. The 2nd defendant told her she had to develop the land before an
indenture would be given her because it is a re-entered plot. <o:p></o:p>Plaintiff said she went
ahead and put up a 3-bedroom house on the land. She had roofed and plastered
the structure, what is left to be done is fixing of doors and windows as well
as other fittings. It took her two and half years to build and roof the
structure. No one challenged her within that period. She engaged a tenant
/watchman whom she put in occupation of the house. <o:p></o:p>She went to the house on
the 22nd of August 1987 and the tenant gave her a note, Exhibit one. The 1st
defendant Mr. Kabutey wrote exhibit one. Exhibit 1 is a note saying the land
was officially given to him Mr. Kabutey, he was inviting her to resolve the issue.
<o:p></o:p>Plaintiff said upon
receiving the note she first of all went to the Lands Commission and showed
Nana Frimpong the note and demanded her documents on the land. She then
contacted Mr. Kabutey. Later the Lands Commission invited both of them. They
appeared before one Mr. Abass Kilber the then overall boss of the Lands
Commission. Mr. Kabutey proved uncooperative so the matter could not be
resolved. <o:p></o:p>On the first day she
contacted Nana Frimpong on the problem that arose he demanded and took the
receipt and letter of entry he issued to her from her. She thought he was going
to use them as evidence of her dealings with the Lands Commission in respect of
the land but he refused to give them back to her. <o:p></o:p>She engaged a lawyer and
had the building valued. She tried to resolve the matter with the 1st defendant
Mr. Kabutey by either buying the land from him or he paying for the structure
on the land. He offered as low as 500,000 cedis for the building, which is not
reasonable. The matter could not be resolved amicably hence this action. <o:p></o:p>The plaintiff denied that
there were any economic trees on the land when she entered the land. According
to her when the case was pending before the court Mr. Kabutey moved and
occupied the house. He lived there for 2 years. It was the court that ordered
him to vacate the house and restrained him from entering there until the issues
are resolved. It was when he was occupying the house that he planted trees and
dug a manhole. <o:p></o:p>Nana Frimpong the 2nd
defendant never entered appearance and never appeared in court to defend the
action. According to the plaintiff she cannot trace him. <o:p></o:p>The 1st defendant Mr.
Kabutey in his defence maintained that the Plot in question was allocated to
him about 1983/84. He applied to the lands Commission for government plot, he
attended an interview and plot No 613 was allocated to him. He was given an
allocation letter, which he cannot trace. He paid development charges after
which the plot was shown to him. He planted mango trees and coconut trees on
the land. He planted these trees in 1984. He visited the plot sometime later
and found that the trees have been cut and some burnt. <o:p></o:p>He was transferred from
Accra and he was away for about 2-3 years. He could not develop the land before
he left Accra because the Lands Commission told him they would be</main>