NANA YAW OWUSU, PAUL NYANTAKYI AND MADAM ELLEN MENSAH vs. HYDRAFORM ESTATES LTD [2014]DLSC2937

NANA YAW OWUSU, PAUL NYANTAKYI AND MADAM ELLEN MENSAH vs. HYDRAFORM ESTATES LT... [2014]DLSC2937

Date	2014-03-26
Suit No.	CIVIL APPEAL NO. J4/62/2013
Citation No.	[2014]DLSC2937

OWUSU (MS.) JSC (PRESIDING)

DOTSE JSC

ANIN YEBOAH JSC

BAFFOE BONNIE JSC

GBADEGBE JSC

HON. J. AYIKOI OTOO WITH HIM DR. ARISTOTLE KOTEY FOR THE PLAINTIFFS /APPELLANTS/ RESPONDENTS.

EDWARD SAM CRABBE ESQ. WITH HIM NATASHA LAMPTEY FOR THE DEFENDANT /RESPONDENT/ APPELLANT

[2014]DLSC2937
																																						<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" >NANA YAW OWUSU, PAUL
NYANTAKYI AND MADAM&nbsp;&nbsp; ELLEN MENSAH<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>HYDRAFORM ESTATES LTD<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;[SUPREME COURT,
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 NO. J4/62/2013&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &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: 26TH
MARCH, 2014<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:&nbsp;&nbsp; <o:p></o:p>HON.&nbsp; J. AYIKOI OTOO WITH HIM DR. ARISTOTLE KOTEY FOR
THE PLAINTIFFS /APPELLANTS/ RESPONDENTS.<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">

EDWARD
SAM CRABBE ESQ. WITH HIM NATASHA LAMPTEY FOR THE DEFENDANT /RESPONDENT/
APPELLANT<o:p></o:p>

</div>CORAM: <o:p></o:p>OWUSU (MS.) JSC
(PRESIDING), DOTSE JSC, ANIN YEBOAH JSC, BAFFOE BONNIE JSC, GBADEGBE JSC<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border-top:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
border-left:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;border-right:none;
padding:1.0pt 0in 1.0pt 0in">

<p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="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>ANIN
YEBOAH, JSC:<o:p></o:p>The plaintiffs/appellants/respondents herein who
(shall be referred to in this judgment as the respondents) instituted an action
against the defendant/respondent/appellant herein who (shall be referred to in
this judgment as the appellant).&nbsp; By
their writ of summons sealed on the 7th of October 2008, the
respondents claimed against the appellant only one relief as follows:<o:p></o:p>“Perpetual injunction restraining the defendant
company, its agents, assigns, servants, privies and workmen or otherwise
howsoever be from interfering with the plaintiffs peaceful and quiet enjoyment
and possession of their land”<o:p></o:p>It must be pointed out that the indorsement was
not for any substantive relief known in law.&nbsp;
No objection was taken by defendant on the recent authority of ROCKSON
V ILIOS SHIPPING CO. SA and WILTEX LTD [2010] SCGLR 341 which
affirmed this court’s previous decision in R v High Court, Tema; Ex
PARTE OWNERS OF MV ESSO SPIRIT (DARYA SHIPPING S.A INTERESTED PARTY) [2003-2004]
2 SCGLR 689 that such a claim is void in law.&nbsp;
In this case however, upon reading the writ together with the
accompanying Statement of Claim the defect in the writ was cured by the
Statement of Claim filed together with the writ.&nbsp; This is the current position of the law as
ably expounded by our worthy brother Gbadegbe, JSC in the more recent case of OPOKU
[№ 2] v AXES CO. LTD [№ 2] [2012] 2 SCGLR 1214 in which our able
brother said as follows:<o:p></o:p>“The writ of summons ought to be read together
with the statement of claim in order to determine if there was any cause of
action before the court.&nbsp; This is so
because a statement of claim may, in appropriate cases as provided for in rule
15 (2) of Order II of the High Court Civil (Procedure) Rules, 2004 (CI 47),
amplify or diminish the scope of the writ on which it is founded”<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The defect on the writ was in our view cured by
the accompanying statement of claim which was filed together with the
writ.&nbsp; The cause of action of the
plaintiff was amply pleaded in the Statement of Claim.<o:p></o:p>THE
FACTS<o:p></o:p>The respondents pleaded among other things, that
the first respondent on 27/05/2004 purchased four plots of land measuring 100 *
100 per plot each from one Ranas Odoi Freeman for GH¢40,000.00. Prior to the
purchase the first respondent said his vendor showed him a copy of a judgment
of a High Court dated the 5/12/2002 declaring ownership in his vendor.&nbsp; His vendor later gave him a copy of an
indenture covering the land which had been prepared by the allodial owners
being the Nungua Stool.&nbsp; The first
respondent later sold portions to the second and third respondents who pursuant
to the transaction developed their respective lands.&nbsp; According to the second respondent he even
contacted Ayikoi Otoo Esq, a lawyer, to ascertain the validity of the judgment
out of which the first respondent derived his title and the response was in the
affirmative.&nbsp; <o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>It was in the course of developing their
respective plots when the agents of the appellant confronted them and prevented
them from further developments.&nbsp; The
managing director of the appellant’s company contended that the judgment out of
which the respondents herein derived their titles to their respective lands had
been set aside.&nbsp; As the respondents insisted
that they were purchasers of their respective lands for valuable considerations
at the time the judgment was subsisting, they commenced action against the
appellant company for the solitary relief referred to earlier in this delivery.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The appellant disputed the facts on which the case
for the respondents was founded.&nbsp; The appellant
pleaded that it was a bona fide owner of the land in dispute which fo</main>