SIAKA ZARIATU AND SIAKA AMINA vs. MRS DOROTHY ASANTE [2011]DLCA3088

Date	2011-07-29
Suit No.	CIVIL APPEAL NO. H1/38/2011
Citation No.	[2011]DLCA3088

MARIAMA OWUSU (MISS) J.A. (PRESIDING)

F.G. KORBIEH J.A.

IRENE C. DANQUAH (MS.) J.A.

[2011]DLCA3088
																																						<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" >SIAKA ZARIATU AND SIAKA
AMINA<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>MRS DOROTHY ASANTE<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;[COURT OF APPEAL, KUMASI]<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">

CIVIL
APPEAL NO. H1/38/2011&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: 29TH
JULY, 2011<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:&nbsp;&nbsp; <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">

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <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">

MARIAMA
OWUSU (MISS) J.A. (PRESIDING), F.G. KORBIEH J.A., IRENE C. DANQUAH (MS.) 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:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">

JUDGEMENT<o:p></o:p>

</div>BY
COURT: JUDGMENT, MARIAMA OWUSU JA;<o:p></o:p>On
19th Day of April 2010, the High Court, [Land Division] Kumasi gave
judgment for the plaintiff/respondent against the defendants/appellants. The
court held among other things as follows;<o:p></o:p>“In the instant case, I have to weigh
the oral and documentary evidence by the plaintiff against the zero evidence of
the defendants. No matter how light the plaintiff’s evidence weighs on the
judicial scale, even if it is 0.01 kilogram, it is heavier and better than the
zero evidence of the defendants. The balance of success therefore swings automatically
in favour of the plaintiff. That is even before the highly credible and
compelling evidence of the plaintiff is considered on its merits.<o:p></o:p>I therefore need not spill more ink in
concluding that the plaintiff was able to establish her claims.<o:p></o:p>As the Supreme Court held in the
Francis Assuming and others [supra] [holding 6], in a one sided case the
verdict can only be one and same is known even before the commencement of the
show.<o:p></o:p>The obvious verdict is that the
plaintiff has established all her claims against the defendants. Final judgment
is entered for the plaintiff in respect of all the reliefs claimed.<o:p></o:p>Title to the disputed house is
declared in the plaintiff.<o:p></o:p>The defendants who are committing
illegal acts and possession of the disputed house are ordered to vacate same
within one week and yield vacant possession to the plaintiff.<o:p></o:p>For their trespasory acts, the court
hereby condemns them to damages in the sum of GH¢1,000.00. <o:p></o:p>The defendants, their agents, servants
and any person claiming title through them are hereby perpetually restrained
from having any dealings with the disputed house.<o:p></o:p>Cost of GH¢1,000.00 allowed against
the defendants".<o:p></o:p>Dissatisfied
with the decision of the court, the defendants appealed to this court.<o:p></o:p>The
Grounds of Appeal are as follows;<o:p></o:p>[a]
The court erred when it entered judgment against the defendants based on the
evidence adduced at the trial.<o:p></o:p>[b]
Additional Grounds of Appeal will be filed upon receipt of the records of
proceedings.<o:p></o:p>Relief
sought from the appellate court:<o:p></o:p>That
the judgment of the High Court be set aside for the merit of the suit to be
heard.<o:p></o:p>Before
going into the merits or otherwise of this appeal, I will like to give a brief
background of this case.<o:p></o:p>The
plaintiff/respondent in this case [herein refer to as respondent] issued a writ
of summons against the defendants/appellants [herein refer to as appellants]
jointly and severally for the following reliefs;<o:p></o:p>[1]
A declaration that ownership to House No. ABZ 6 Zongo Abuakwa Kumasi is vested
in the plaintiff.<o:p></o:p>[2]
Recovery of possession.<o:p></o:p>