EMMANUEL KWAME OFORI vs. REYNOLDS KWASI BOSOMPIM [2004]DLHC7527

Date	2004-06-23
Suit No.	SUIT NO. AL 9/2003
Citation No.	[2004]DLHC7527

HIS LORDSHIP YAW APPAU J.

PETER HAYIBOR ESQUIRE FOR PLAINTIFF.

DAN AFARI-YEBOAH. ESQUIRE FOR DEFENDANT.

[2004]DLHC7527
																																						<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" ><a name="_Hlk24368112">EMMANUEL KWAME OFORI<o:p></o:p></a><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,serif;
mso-fareast-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;
color:#00B0F0">vs.<o:p></o:p>REYNOLDS KWASI BOSOMPIM<o:p></o:p>[HIGH COURT (FAST
TRACK/AUTOMATION DIVISION), ACCRA]<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">

SUIT NO. AL 9/2003&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;&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; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; DATE: 23RD JUNE
2004<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:<o:p></o:p>PETER
HAYIBOR, ESQUIRE FOR PLAINTIFF.<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">

DAN AFARI-YEBOAH. ESQUIRE
FOR 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:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">

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

</div>The
plaintiff sued the defendant in this action claiming four reliefs. These are: <o:p></o:p>“(a) A declaration that plaintiff is a bona fide
purchaser for value without notice of any irregularity or illegality in the
sale of H/No. C. 87/5 Nima, Accra in 1976 at an auction and on which plaintiff
has spent considerable sums of money to build a twelve-room three-storey
building. <o:p></o:p>(b) A declaration that in view of plaintiff’s rights over
the property and the considerable change in character and value of the property
at plaintiff’s expense, the defendant's remedy if any against the
Attorney-General and the Department of National Lotteries lies in the recovery
of the value of the property and not recovery of possession. <o:p></o:p>(c) An order setting aside part of defendant's judgment
ordering for recovery of possession of H/No. C. 87/5 Nima, Accra being occupied
by the plaintiff and his family. <o:p></o:p>(d) Perpetual Injunction restraining the defendant, his
agents, servants, workmen and successors in title or whosoever and howsoever
from interfering with the said H/No. C. 87/5 Nima, Accra. <o:p></o:p>In
his pleaded case plaintiff contended that somewhere in 1976 he purchased the
property in dispute at a public auction made at the instance of the Department
of National Lotteries and fully paid the purchase price to the Department of
National Lotteries. After the purchase, he took possession immediately and
constructed a three-storey building containing 12 rooms on the land in which he
has been living with his family for the past 28 years. <o:p></o:p>Recently
he had information that the property he purchased originally belonged to the
defendant in this case who was tried by the Military Tribunal for subversion in
1974 for defrauding the Department of National Lotteries and sentenced to
thirty (30) years imprisonment after which his properties, including the one in
dispute, were sold by public auction. <o:p></o:p>He
again had information that the defendant, in 1994, took the Department of
National Lotteries and the Attorney-General to court challenging the sale of
his properties including the one in dispute on the ground that the order of the
Tribunal that his properties be sold was never confirmed by the confirming
authority as the law under which he was tried provides. <o:p></o:p>The
High Court, which heard defendant's case gave him judgment and ordered that he
either re-possesses the said properties from the Department of National
Lotteries or the value of the said properties, be paid to him. <o:p></o:p>According
to plaintiff, it has come to his notice that the defendant is preparing to
claim the property in dispute from him that was why he commenced this action
against him seeking the above declarations. <o:p></o:p>He
contended that since he purchased the property at a public auction without
notice of any procedural irregularity in the judgment upon which the property
was sold and has spent considerable sums of money in improving the property by
the construction of a three-storey building on same in which he has been living
with his family for the past twenty-eight (28) years, it would be unfair,
inequitable and illegal to order defendant to recover it from him. <o:p></o:p>He
said, if the defendant has any remedy at all under the judgment he obtained
from the High Court on 25/10/2001, it is against the Department of National
Lotteries for the refund to him of the value of the property as it used to be
before the sale but not the recovery of the property as it is now from him. <o:p></o:p>In
his defence in brief, the defendant contended that since the Court, on
25/10/2001, ordered that his properties, including the one in issue should be
returned to him, he is exercising his right as pronounced by the court by
demanding the return of his house which was illegally purchased by the
plaintiff. <o:p></o:p>He
accordingly prayed for the dismissal of plaintiff's case. <o:p></o:p>Though
counsel for the plaintiff filed about six issues for determination, he and the
defence counsel later agreed or concluded that the major issue in the case that
could settle the case one way or the other was a legal one as there was no
dispute with regard to the facts so there was no need to call e</main>