GBANDAAN GBEGRE TENG vs. NABA POBORTAABA NAABIL, AWUDU PAGRA NAABIL, CHARLES NDANBON AND SHAANXI MINING GHANA LTD [2014]DLCA4758

GBANDAAN GBEGRE TENG vs. NABA POBORTAABA NAABIL, AWUDU PAGRA NAABIL, CHARLES ND... [2014]DLCA4758

Date	2014-05-27
Suit No.	CIVIL APPEAL SUIT NO: H1/09/2014
Citation No.	[2014]DLCA4758

D. ADJEI JA (PRESIDING)

LOVELACE-JOHNSON JA

ACKAH-YENSU JA

JOHN A. NDEBUGRE FOR PLAINTIFF/APPLICANT/APPELLANT

JOSEPH DINDIOK KPEMKA FOR DEFENDANTS/RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS

[2014]DLCA4758
																																						<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" >GBANDAAN GBEGRE TENG<o:p></o:p>(PLAINTIFF/APPELLANT)<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>NABA POBORTAABA NAABIL,
AWUDU PAGRA NAABIL, CHARLES NDANBON AND SHAANXI MINING GHANA LTD <o:p></o:p>(DEFENDANTS/RESPONDENTS)<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">

CIVIL
APPEAL SUIT NO: H1/09/2014&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &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: 27TH MAY, 2014<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:<o:p></o:p>JOHN A. NDEBUGRE FOR
PLAINTIFF/APPLICANT/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">

JOSEPH
DINDIOK KPEMKA FOR DEFENDANTS/RESPONDENTS/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">

D.
ADJEI JA (PRESIDING), LOVELACE-JOHNSON JA, ACKAH-YENSU JA<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>BARBARA
ACKAH-YENSU, JA<o:p></o:p>This is an appeal against
the Ruling of the High Court, Bolgatanga in respect of an application by the
Plaintiff/Appellant (hereinafter simply referred to as “Plaintiff”) in which he
sought an order of interim injunction to restrain the 2nd, 3rd
and 4th Defendants/Respondents (also to be referred to simply as Defendants),
or their agents, workmen, heirs, successors or assigns from entering or
continuing to enter or otherwise remaining on all that piece or parcel of land containing
an approximate area of 747.41 acres situate lying and being at&nbsp; a place commonly called and known as Gbani in
the Talensi District of the Upper East Region bounded to the North, South and
East &nbsp;by other Gbani lands and to the
West by the Oun stream; and from carrying out gold or any other mining or
related operations thereon, pending final determination of the suit.<o:p></o:p>The grounds for the said
application as deposed to in the supporting affidavit were that the Plaintiff
acting as the lawful Attorney of Gbandaan Gbegre Teng, acting head of Gbani
clan of Gbani, filed a writ against the Defendants in respect of the piece of
parcel of land described above.&nbsp; He
claimed that the 1st Defendant who was the chief of Gbani, without
his consent as owner of the said land, granted portions thereof to 2nd,
3rd&nbsp; and 4th Defendants
for mining operations. And, that the mining operations by the Defendants on the
land had caused and continued to cause grave hardship and inconvenience to the
Plaintiff and the several members of his clan. Furthermore, the Plaintiff as well
as the various members of the Gbani Clan were likely to suffer economic loss
and irreparable damage to their land should the application be refused.<o:p></o:p>In their joint affidavit in
opposition to the application deposed to by 1st Defendant, the chief
of Gbani, they contended that the 1st Defendant owned the disputed
land which for over twenty (20) years, the Government of Ghana had marked out as
Small Scale Mining area. Hence, over twenty (20) licensed Small Scale Mining
Concessionaries had been granted mining rights on portions of the land.&nbsp; Furthermore 1st Defendant had for
the over 20 years period been responsible for granting or leasing out portions of
the land to prospective Small Scale Mining Companies with the approval of the Government
of Ghana.&nbsp; 2nd and 3rd
Defendants had mining concessions granted and approved by the Government of
Ghana on the disputed land which they had been operating since. 4th Defendant
provided mining support services to the 2nd and 3rd
Defendants.<o:p></o:p>Defendants contended
further that their operations on the disputed land had been in compliance with
the Minerals and Mining Act, 2006 (Act 703).&nbsp;
And that 2nd, 3rd and 4th Defendants
had invested over Fifty Million Dollars ($50,000) on the land and would suffer
greater hardship, inconvenience and irreparable damage if the application was
granted. The Plaintiff on the other hand, was unlikely to suffer any hardship
as he was not carrying out any economic activity on the land.<o:p></o:p>The trial Judge ruled as
follows;-<o:p></o:p>“On consideration of all the circumstances
of the case, that of the Applicant and that of the Respondents, the Court does
not find it just and convenient to grant the application restraining the Respondents
pending the outcome of the substantive suit filed by the applicant.&nbsp; The application is dismissed”.<o:p></o:p>The Plaintiff is aggrieved
with this ruling and hence this appeal. Plaintiff filed the following grounds
of appeal;-<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
&nbsp;&nbsp;“<o:p></o:p>