KWAME KWAAKO ANTWI vs. OPHELIA PANU [2014]DLCA16200

Date	2014-11-13
Suit No.	SUIT NO.HI/23/12
Citation No.	[2014]DLCA16200

ABBAN (J.A.) – PRESIDING

OFOE (J.A.)

TORKORNOO (J.A.)

FRANKLIN A. KODJOE FOR DEFENDANT/APPELLANT

SAFO MENSAH FOR PLAINITFF/RESPONDENT

[2014]DLCA16200
																																						<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" >KWAME KWAAKO ANTWI <o:p></o:p>(PLAINTIFF/RESPONDENT)<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>OPHELIA PANU <o:p></o:p>(DEFENDANT/APPELLANT)<o:p></o:p>[COURT OF APPEAL, 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: 0in 0in 1pt;">

SUIT
NO.HI/23/12&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &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: 13TH NOVEMBER, 2014<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:<o:p></o:p>FRANKLIN A. KODJOE FOR
DEFENDANT/APPELLANT<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: 0in 0in 1pt;">

<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:
justify;text-justify:inter-ideograph;border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in;mso-padding-alt:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">SAFO MENSAH FOR
PLAINITFF/RESPONDENT<o:p></o:p>

</div>CORAM:
<o:p></o:p>ABBAN (J.A.) – PRESIDING, OFOE (J.A.), TORKORNOO
(J.A.)<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 0in;">

<p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="margin-bottom:0in;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:0in;mso-padding-alt:1.0pt 0in 1.0pt 0in">JUDGMENT<o:p></o:p>

</div>OFOE,J.A:<o:p></o:p>This is an appeal that had travelled all the way from the
Adjabeng District Court where the plaintiff sued the defendant for<o:p></o:p>“1.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Recovery of possession of the said rooms occupied by the
defendant<o:p></o:p>2.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Order to hand over keys to the other rooms in the said
house<o:p></o:p>3. &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; General
Damages<o:p></o:p>4.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 
Cost occasioned the suit and any other reliefs”.<o:p></o:p>The facts grounding these claims of the plaintiff are not
complicated. They are that the defendant was the plaintiff’s acquaintance who
plaintiff offered a room to occupy in his completed building located at
Odorkor, Accra. He made this offer on the request of the defendant who had then
been ejected from her rented accommodation. The defendant without his consent
or permission has given out other rooms in the property to others and not
accounting to him. This did not go down well with him and therefore requested
the defendant to vacate the premises. The defendant has flatly refused. Hence
this writ before the District Court.<o:p></o:p>The defendant’s position on the matter was that at all
material times she was the wife of the plaintiff and had contributed to putting
up the building, the subject matter of plaintiff’s claim. According to
defendant she did not only supervise the construction of the building but also
put in her own monies and monies remitted to her by the husband who was living
outside, to get the building to the state it is now. Her defence in substance
is that being a husband to the plaintiff and therefore in her matrimonial home
and having contributed substantially to the construction of the property she
cannot simply be ejected as the plaintiff is seeking to do.<o:p></o:p>After trial the district magistrate found that there was
no marriage between the parties because the defendant failed to lead evidence
to prove the marriage she alleged. In respect of a marriage certificate exhibited
by the defendant as exhibit 1 and 1A purportedly issued under PNDC Law 112, the
trial magistrate found these to have been fraudulently procured.<o:p></o:p>Amongst other issues was the construction of the property,
the subject matter of the suit. Both parties made claims to certain additions
made to the property.&nbsp; Defendant tendered
receipts totaling 22m cedis as evidencing works she did on the property. She
also admitted the plaintiff remitted to her 18m cedis. In respect of this 18m
cedis she did not tender any receipts. Even though the trial magistrate
wondered why this 18m cedis should not be part of the 22m cedis claimed by the
defendant the court granted her the claim to the 22m cedis and ordered that
same be paid to her.<o:p></o:p>By the order of the court defendant was to vacate the
premises after refund to her of the 22m cedis.<o:p></o:p>The judgment of the magistrate court provoked 15 grounds
of appeal. These were all dismissed by the trial High Court. Three of these
dismissed grounds are before us.<o:p></o:p>They read as follows:<o:p></o:p>“1.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; That
the appeal judge erred in law when he upheld the decision of the trial court
that there was no marriage between the defendant and the plaintiff in the light
of the overwhelming evidence adduced at the trial.<o:p></o:p>2. &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; The Appeal Judge erred in law when he held that the trial
magistrate had jurisdiction to hear the matter at the magistrate court, Adjabeng
even though there is overwhelming evidence from the trial court’s own record
that the matter was held at the magistrates court, Dodowa.<o:p></o:p>3.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; The appeal judge erred when he held that the 2nd
plaintiff had also done some work on the property when there was no </main>