KORKOR HAYFORD & 2 OTHERS. vs. ADONGO AYELIKAI [2013]DLCA4843

Date	2013-01-17
Suit No.	SUIT NO: H1/204/2011
Citation No.	[2013]DLCA4843

MARIAMA OWUSU J.A. (PRESIDING)

GYAESAYOR J.A.

DZAMEFE J.A.

MR. ORRACA TETTEH FOR PLAINTIFFS/APPELLANTS.

MR. MAJID AMANDI FOR 1ST CO-DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT.

[2013]DLCA4843
																																						<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" >KORKOR HAYFORD &amp; 2 OTHERS.<o:p></o:p>(PLAINTIFFS/APPELLANTS)<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>ADONGO AYELIKAI<o:p></o:p>(DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT)<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</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:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">

SUIT
NO: H1/204/2011&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;DATE: 17TH JANUARY, 2013<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:<o:p></o:p>MR.
ORRACA TETTEH FOR PLAINTIFFS/APPELLANTS.<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">

MR.
MAJID AMANDI FOR 1ST CO-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:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">

MARIAMA
OWUSU J.A. (PRESIDING), GYAESAYOR 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:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">

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

</div>MARIAMA
OWUSU, J.A:<o:p></o:p>On
31-5-2010, the High Court, Accra, dismissed plaintiffs’ claim for declaration
of title to House No. D 15/3 Amamomo as family property &nbsp;and Perpetual Injunction restraining the
defendants, their agents, assigns, privies and all those claiming through them
from interfering with the disputed land as not proved. The court then gave
judgment for the 5th defendant on his counterclaim as follows;<o:p></o:p>“A
counterclaim is in the nature of a fresh claim and the counter claimant has the
burden to prove his counterclaim to the satisfaction of the court, but
following my finding that the auction of House No. D15/3 was regularly
conducted, it follows that 5th defendant is entitled to a
declaration that he lawfully acquired House No. D15/3, in the public auction
and I so declare.<o:p></o:p>Plaintiffs,
their agent’s assigns, successors etc are hereby restrained from interfering
with 5th defendant’s peaceful possession and enjoyment of House No.
D15/3, Amamomo, Accra. 5th defendant is also entitled to accrued
rent or mesne profits”.<o:p></o:p>Dissatisfied
with the decision of the court, the plaintiffs appealed to this court on the
following grounds:<o:p></o:p>a.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
That the judgment is against the weight of
evidence.<o:p></o:p>b.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
That the trial judge failed to appreciate
the evidence led as to the family nature of the property in dispute.<o:p></o:p>c.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
That the trial judge placed a greater
burden of proof on plaintiffs/appellants than the Law required.<o:p></o:p>d.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;