AMOAKO BLANKSON vs. NANA BONSU & TWO OTHERS [2013]DLHC8163

Date	2013-05-28
Suit No.	SUIT NO. LS64/2000
Citation No.	[2013]DLHC8163

HIS LORDSHIP JUSTICE JACOB B. BOON

STEPHEN OPPONG FOR PLAINTIFF.

WILLIAM KUSI FOR THE DEFENDANTS.

[2013]DLHC8163
																																						<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" >AMOAKO
BLANKSON<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>NANA BONSU
&amp; TWO OTHERS<o:p></o:p>[HIGH COURT,
KUMASI]<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. LS64/2000&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &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: 28TH
MAY, 2013<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:<o:p></o:p>STEPHEN
OPPONG FOR PLAINTIFF.<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">

WILLIAM
KUSI FOR THE DEFENDANTS. <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">

HIS LORDSHIP JUSTICE JACOB B. BOON<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;line-height:115%;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>The plaintiff is a
trader who, with the first defendant and others, carried on their business
activities at the popular Suame-Magazine in Kumasi, close to St. Joseph Junior
High Secondary School at a place called Anomangye-Nkwanta. To promote their
businesses, plaintiff averred that he and the others formed what he termed a “loose
union” of which he and the first defendant were executive members. He
asserted that as they operated mainly from kiosks and other temporary
structures, they approached the owners of the school for permission to build
permanent structures. It is the case of plaintiff that Kumasi Metropolitan
Assembly planned to build a protective wall around the school compound. However,
they pleaded with the Assembly and it was agreed for the traders rather to
erect the wall, which was done. According to the plaintiff, in December 1998
they were given the green light to construct the structures. He said they
agreed among themselves each trader would build his or her structure
immediately behind the wall in the space corresponding to the location of their
temporary structures. He said initially, it was decided the traders will build
their individual structures; however, for the sake of uniformity, the first
defendant opted to construct all of them on behalf of the others. Each trader
was therefore tasked to contribute GH¢900.00 towards the completion of the
project. According to the plaintiff, he paid by installments, a total of
GH¢400.00 to the first defendant as his contribution, but at a later date when
he presented the final installment of GH¢500.00, first defendant rejected it on
the excuse that the space behind where his kiosk occupied had been allocated to
a different person. Plaintiff originally claimed the store built in that space
was No.11. He later amended his writ of summons in which he stated it was renumbered
as 12. It came out that a limited liability company known and called “Gabbat
Co. Ltd”, the second defendant herein, was put in place and claimed to be the
owner of the &nbsp;new stores, often referred
to as &nbsp;“Complex”. Undisputed evidence
emerged at the trial that the assets of Gabbat Company were taken over by
another company which was incorporated with the consent of some of the
initiators of the Complex, including plaintiff and first defendant. The new
company is named Asomdwee House Co Ltd. Title of the suit was amended
accordingly, with leave of the court, for the new company to replace Gabbat Co
Ltd as the second defendant. Be that as it may, store No 12 was allocated by
the first and second defendants to the third defendant. <o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>On the 9th
of June, 2008, this court, presided over by my brother, Justice Imoro Ziblim,
granted an interlocutory injunction to restrain the first defendant from
entering the disputed store. However, upon an application by the third
defendant, supported by the first defendant, on 31st July 2008,
Justice Imorm Ziblim varied the order of injunction by permitting the store to
be put in use by the third defendant on the basis that it was his only source
of livelihood. It was at this stage that third defendant joined the suit to
protect his interest in the property. <o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>By his amended writ,
the plaintiff therefore claimed against the defendants as follows:<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</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; A
declaration that he being the original allottee of the plot of land marked as
No. 12 located on the grounds of the St. Joseph R.C. J.S.S. Suame, and which
plot was meant for the construction of stores, the defendant had to arbitrarily
wrongly allocate the said store to another person, so as to deprive plaintiff
of its use.<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;