PATRICK ADOFO vs. ALEX ARMAH [2012]DLHC12139

Date	2012-04-25
Suit No.	SUIT NO. IRC 497/09
Citation No.	[2012]DLHC12139

HIS LORDSHIP JUSTICE JOHN AJET-NASAM

LONGINUS CHINEDU FOR PLAINTIFF

[2012]DLHC12139
																																						<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" >PATRICK ADOFO<o:p></o:p>(PLAINTIFF)<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>ALEX ARMAH <o:p></o:p>(DEFENDANT)<o:p></o:p>[HIGH COURT, ACCRA]<o:p></o:p><div style="border-top: none; border-right: none; border-left: none; border-image: initial; border-bottom-width: 1.5pt; border-bottom-color: windowtext; padding: 0cm 0cm 1pt;">

SUIT NO. IRC 497/09&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &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: 25TH&nbsp;APRIL 2012<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <o:p></o:p><div style="border-top: none; border-right: none; border-left: none; border-image: initial; border-bottom-width: 1.5pt; border-bottom-color: windowtext; padding: 0cm 0cm 1pt;">

</div>CORAM<o:p></o:p>HIS
LORDSHIP JUSTICE JOHN AJET-NASAM<o:p></o:p><div style="border-top-width: 1.5pt; border-top-color: windowtext; border-left: none; border-bottom-width: 1.5pt; border-bottom-color: windowtext; border-right: none; padding: 1pt 0cm;">

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

</div>This suit was a
transferred one upon the directions of the Honourable Lady Chief Justice.
Beacon Law Consult, a firm of solicitors entered appearance for the defendant
and filed a defence. Apart from this, nothing happened again. There are on the
docket, series of hearing notices calling upon the defendant to come to
prosecute his case. Unfortunately, these calls unheeded to.<o:p></o:p>The Court has no
other option that to go ahead with the suit. During this time, the defendant
was always served through his lawyer never came. The plaintiff was therefore
called upon to testify. This prelude to the judgment has to be made for the appreciation
of the fact that, this judgment has to come without hearing the defendant
testify.<o:p></o:p>In the endorsement
to the writ of summons, the plaintiff claimed the following reliefs’:<o:p></o:p>(a)<span style="font-style: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-weight: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-family: &quot;Times New Roman&quot;;">&nbsp; Declaration that the building plot
described in the schedule in the statement of claim is the bonafide property of
the plaintiff having acquired it from the Nokoi Olai Stool family.<o:p></o:p>(b)<span style="font-style: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-weight: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-family: &quot;Times New Roman&quot;;">&nbsp;&nbsp; Perpetual Injunction<o:p></o:p>(c)<span style="font-style: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-weight: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-family: &quot;Times New Roman&quot;;">&nbsp;&nbsp;
Damages
for trespass.<o:p></o:p>In the schedule,
the land in dispute had been described as:<o:p></o:p>“All that piece or
parcel of land &nbsp;&nbsp;situate lying and being at Tabora Accra and
bounded on the North-West by proposed road measuring 70 feet more or less on
the North-East by lessor’s land measuring 200 feet more or less on the
South-East by proposed road measuring 70 feet more or less on the South-West by
lessor’s land measuring 200 feet more or less and containing an approximate
area of 0.32 acre more or less which said piece or parcel of land is …
particularly delineated on the site plan attached hereto and thereto shown
edged pink”.<o:p></o:p>I don’t think, I
need to consider the statement of defence that has been filed by the
defendant.&nbsp; As I said in the prelude to
this judgment, no evidence was given by the defendant. Even at the direction
stage, the defendant never took part. The plaintiff, through his attorney
needed to produce evidence to convince the Court. <o:p></o:p>The Evidence Act,
1975 (NRCD 323) SS 11 (1), (4) and 12 stated:<o:p></o:p>“11 (1) for the
purposes of this Act, the burden of producing evidence means the obligation of
a party to introduce sufficient evidence to avoid a ruling on the issue against
the&nbsp; &nbsp;party.<o:p></o:p>(4) In other
circumstances the burden of producing evidence requires a party to produce
</main>