KWAKU BONSU (PLAINTIFF/ RESPONDENT) vs. AMA AGYEMAN (DEFENDANT/ APPELLANT) [2011]DLCA7929

Date	2011-06-16
Suit No.	SUIT NO. HI/59/2011
Citation No.	[2011]DLCA7929

KANYOKE J.A. (PRESIDING)

OFOE J.A

DZAMEFE J.A

MR. S.K. BOAFO FOR THE DEFENDANT/APPELLANT

MR. KWAME BOAFO AKUFO FOR PLAINTIFF/RESPONDENT

[2011]DLCA7929
																																						<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" >KWAKU BONSU<o:p></o:p>(PLAINTIFF/ RESPONDENT)<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>AMA AGYEMAN<o:p></o:p>(DEFENDANT/ APPELLANT)<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">

SUIT NO. HI/59/2011&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; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &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: 16TH JUNE, 2011<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:<o:p></o:p>MR.
S.K. BOAFO FOR THE DEFENDANT/APPELLANT<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>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">

KANYOKE
J.A. (PRESIDING),
OFOE J.A,
DZAMEFE 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">

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

</div>OFOE, J.A: The
parties will continue in this appeal to be plaintiff and defendant as they were
in the trial court.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;The plaintiff’s case in the trial court,
tersely put, was that the defendant offered her 0.6 acre land in the Achimota part
of the Motorway Extension for sale to him at a price of 1billion old Cedis.
According to the plaintiff the transaction started from September and he had to
sue in November. &nbsp;There was a written
agreement to that effect. He accepted the offer and made a total part payment
of 6000dollars and 2million cedis. Within weeks the defendant sought to withdraw
from the transaction intending to sell the property to a third party. This compelled
him to seek from the High Court:<o:p></o:p>“a.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; An order
of specific performance&nbsp; of the agreement
reached between Plaintiff&nbsp; and the
Defendant on or around&nbsp; the 3rd
of October, 2007 in respect of&nbsp; land
lying and situate&nbsp; at Achimota part of
the Motorway Extension and more properly described as land bounded on the&nbsp; North-west by bearing 345O00’ and
distance 100 feet more or less bounded on the North-East by bearing&nbsp; 73000’ and distance 280 feet&nbsp; more or less bounded on the South-East by
bearing 160000’ and&nbsp; distance
100 feet more or less bounded on the South-West by bearing 253000’
and distance 280 feet more or less and containing an approximate&nbsp; area of 0.64 Acre 0r o.26 Hectare or as
particularly delineated on the plan hereto attached.<o:p></o:p>b.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; An
injunction restraining the Defendant from selling to any third party apart from
the Plaintiff, the land, subject-matter of the suit pending the final
determination of this matter.<o:p></o:p>c.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Costs<o:p></o:p>d.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Any other
orders as the honorable court may deem fit.”<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;The defendant has a different story. It is her
case on the pleadings that she indeed met the plaintiff at the Lands Commission
where he expressed interest in the land in dispute. She told the plaintiff that
her brother-in-law had given her 30m cedis for the processing of the documents
for her benefit and that of the children. She will therefore need the consent
of this brother- in- law and the children before she could offer the property
for sale. With this understanding she took from the plaintiff an amount of US 4000
dollars off</main>