OPANYIN YAW DONKOR vs. MERCY AMPAH AND CONSTANCE AMPAH [2014]DLCA2891

Date	2014-02-20
Suit No.	CIVIL APPEAL NO. H1/222/2011
Citation No.	[2014]DLCA2891

JUSTICE HENRIETTA ABBAN JA [PRESIDING]

JUSTICE K. A. ACQUAYE JA

JUSTICE M WELBOURNE JA

MR OBENG MANU (JNR) FOR APPELLANT

MR FRANK YANKEY FOR RESPONDENTS

[2014]DLCA2891
																																						<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" >OPANYIN YAW DONKOR<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>MERCY AMPAH AND CONSTANCE
AMPAH<o:p></o:p>&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; [COURT OF APPEAL, ACCRA]&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; <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">

CIVIL
APPEAL NO. H1/222/2011&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;DATE: 20TH
FEBRUARY, 2014<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:&nbsp;&nbsp; <o:p></o:p>MR OBENG MANU (JNR) FOR
APPELLANT,<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
FRANK YANKEY FOR RESPONDENTS<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">

JUSTICE
HENRIETTA ABBAN JA [PRESIDING], JUSTICE K. A. ACQUAYE JA, JUSTICE M WELBOURNE
JA<o:p></o:p>

</div>JUDGEMENT<o:p></o:p>MARGARET
WELBOURNE, J.A. <o:p></o:p>This is an appeal from the
decision of the High Court delivered on
14th December, 2009.<o:p></o:p>THE
GROUNDS OF APPEAL<o:p></o:p>On 9th February,
2010, the plaintiff/respondent/appellant filed an appeal against the judgment
of the High Court dated 14th December, 2009.&nbsp; <o:p></o:p>RELIEF
SOUGHT<o:p></o:p>The whole of the Judgment of
the High Court judge dated 14th December, 2009, and the costs of GH¢2,000.00 awarded against the
plaintiff/respondents /applicant be set aside.<o:p></o:p>GROUNDS
OF APPEAL<o:p></o:p>i)&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; The learned High Court judge erred in
law when, as an appellate judge, he substituted a case proprio motu for the Co-Defendants/Appellants when the
Co-Defendants/Appellants had themselves sworn to an affidavit in the District
Magistrate Court to the effect that the matter before the District Magistrate
court was a landlord and tenant matter
and that they had instituted a title suit in the High Court to determine
ownership of the property.<o:p></o:p>PARTICULARS OF ERROR OF LAW<o:p></o:p>a)&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Holding that there was no
landlord-tenant relationship between the plaintiff/respondent and the
Co-Defendants/Appellants when they themselves had sworn to an affidavit that
the matter is a landlord tenant case.<o:p></o:p>b)&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Ignoring the express and written
admission by the Co-Defendants/Appellants/Respondents that they were tenants
and holding that they are not tenants.<o:p></o:p>ii)&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; The learned High Court judge erred in
law when he overlooked the fact that it was the Co-Defendants themselves who
applied to join the suit in the District Magistrate Court, in the first
instance, “so that all matter in controversy will be effectively adjudicated
upon” and found the matter on evidence till judgment.<o:p></o:p>PARTICULARS
OF ERROR OF LAW<o:p></o:p>“a)&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Failing to consider the fact that it was
the Co-Defendants who applied to join a simple suit involving the Plaintiff
landlord and some of his tenants.<o:p></o:p>b)&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Ignoring the fact that the
Co-Defendants after being joined to the suit instituted a title suit in the
High Court, by which said suit they sought to prove their title to the house
they knowing very well that the action before the district Magistrate Court is
a simple landlord and tenant suit.<o:p></o:p>iii)&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; The learned High Court judge erred when
he held that the District Magistrate Court had no jurisdiction to hear and
determine the matter because it was not landlord and tenant matter.<o:p></o:p>iv)&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; The judgment is against the weight of
evidence.<o:p></o:p>v)&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; The cost awarded was harsh and
excessive.<o:p></o:p>