MADAM AKOSUA SOSU (PLAINTIFF/APPELLANT) vs. KWAME KLUTSE (1ST DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT) WILLIAM OHENAKU NTOW (2ND DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT) [2009]DLCA7855

MADAM AKOSUA SOSU (PLAINTIFF/APPELLANT) vs. KWAME KLUTSE (1ST DEFENDANT/RESPONDE... [2009]DLCA7855

Date	2009-11-26
Suit No.	CIVIL APPEAL NO.: H1/114/07
Citation No.	[2009]DLCA7855

E. K. PIESARE J.A. (PRESIDING)

P. K. GYAESAYOR J.A.

E. K. AYEBI J.A.

MR. YAO YEGBEY FOR THE PLAINTIFF/APPELLANT’

MR. JOHN KLU FOR THE 1ST DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT

MR. FREMPONG BOADU FOR 2ND DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT

[2009]DLCA7855
																																						<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" >MADAM AKOSUA SOSU<o:p></o:p>(PLAINTIFF/APPELLANT)<o:p></o:p><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>KWAME KLUTSE<o:p></o:p>(1ST
DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT)<o:p></o:p>WILLIAM OHENAKU NTOW<o:p></o:p>(2ND DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT)<o:p></o:p>[COURT
OF APPEAL, 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">

CIVIL APPEAL NO.:&nbsp; H1/114/07&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: 26TH
NOVEMBER, 2009<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:<o:p></o:p>MR.
YAO YEGBEY FOR THE PLAINTIFF/APPELLANT’<o:p></o:p>MR.
JOHN KLU FOR THE 1ST DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT<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">

MR.
FREMPONG BOADU FOR 2ND DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT<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">

E.
K. PIESARE J.A. (PRESIDING), P. K. GYAESAYOR J.A., E. K. AYEBI J.A.<o:p></o:p>

</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>AYEBI J.A.<o:p></o:p>This is an appeal from decision of an Accra Fast
Track High Court dated 14th February 2005.&nbsp; The appellant is the plaintiff and wife of
the 1st defendant/respondent.&nbsp;
For ease of reference, I will refer to her simply as plaintiff, 1st
defendant/respondent as 1st defendant and 2nd
defendant/respondent as 2nd defendant.<o:p></o:p>The subject-matter of the suit is H/No. A 725/15,
Dansoman-Accra.&nbsp; It consists of a main
block and an outhouse.&nbsp; The plaintiff and
1st defendant were married couples.&nbsp;
They used to live in the whole house as their matrimonial home with
their children.&nbsp; But at the time matters
leading to this suit arose, they occupied only the outhouse.&nbsp; The 2nd defendant, a staff of the
Bank of Ghana, occupied the main block.<o:p></o:p>Both 1st defendant and 2nd
defendant have counter-claimed in the suit. &nbsp;The facts as presented by the plaintiff and 1st
defendant suggest a calculated web of intrigues committed by the 2nd
defendant against the 1st defendant.&nbsp;
On the part of the 2nd defendant however, it is a case of
marital collusion of the nature told in Acts of Apostles of Ananias and his
wife, Sapphira in the Holy Bible.&nbsp; For
that collusion, they paid dearly for it with their lives.&nbsp; From the judgment of the trial court, the
plaintiff and 1st defendant lost their property.<o:p></o:p>The plaintiff launched this suit on 12th
June 1997.&nbsp; According to her, some time ago
she noticed 2nd defendant was paying regular visits to the 1st
defendant her husband.&nbsp; Upon inquiry, 1st
defendant told her that 2nd defendant was interested in taking
tenancy of a portion of the house and that he (1st def.) was
negotiating with the employers of the 2nd defendant.&nbsp; Not long after, 2nd defendant
moved in to occupy the main block comprising seven rooms.<o:p></o:p>She then left for her hometown to attend to her
sick mother.&nbsp; On her return, she noticed
that 2nd defendant was making massive structural changes to the
house.&nbsp; She confronted the 2nd
defendant about the source of his authority to make the changes as a
tenant.&nbsp; The 2nd defendant
answered that he had bought the house from 1st defendant, her
husband.<o:p></o:p>According to plaintiff, she confronted the 1st
defendant about the claim of the 2nd defendant. &nbsp;1st defendant denied he sold the
house to the 2nd defendant.&nbsp;
So she caused her solicitors to write to the 2nd defendant
that 1st defendant is not the sole owner of the house.&nbsp; For she owns the house jointly with 1st
defendant and since her consent was not sought, the purported sale of the house
to him (2nd def.) was invalid.<o:p></o:p>Notwithstanding the letter disclosing her interest
in the house to the 2nd defendant, he continued the structural changes
which resulted in the damage to her oven.&nbsp;
Over and above the changes, the 2nd defendant gave them
notice to quit the house.&nbsp; The plaintiff
therefore sued her husband and 2nd defendant the alleged purchaser
jointly and severally for:<o:p></o:p>