MURIEL VAUGHAN-WILLIAMS vs. B. K. OPPONG [2014]DLSC5609

Date	2014-05-28
Suit No.	CIVIL APPEAL NO.J4/11/2014
Citation No.	[2014]DLSC5609

ATUGUBA J.S.C. (PRESIDING)

ANSAH J.S.C.

ADINYIRA (MRS) J.S.C.

BAFFOE-BONNIE J.S.C.

AKOTO-BAMFO (MRS) J.S.C.

S. K. AMOAH ESQ. FOR THE DEFENDANT /RESPONDENT /APPELLANT.

GEORGE HEWARD- MILLS ESQ. WITH HIM CHRIS KING FOR THE PLAINTIFF/ APPELLANT/RESPONDENT.

[2014]DLSC5609
																																						<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" >MURIEL VAUGHAN-WILLIAMS<o:p></o:p>(PLAINTIFF/APPELLANT/RESPONDENT)<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>B. K. OPPONG<o:p></o:p>(DEFENDANT/
RESPONDENT/APPELLANT)<o:p></o:p>[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">

<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">CIVIL APPEAL
NO.J4/11/2014&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; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; 28TH
MAY 2014<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:<o:p></o:p>S.&nbsp; K. AMOAH&nbsp;&nbsp;
ESQ. FOR THE DEFENDANT /RESPONDENT /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">

</div>CORAM:<o:p></o:p>ATUGUBA
J.S.C. (PRESIDING), ANSAH J.S.C., ADINYIRA
(MRS) J.S.C., BAFFOE-BONNIE
J.S.C.,
AKOTO-BAMFO (MRS)
J.S.C. <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="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>ADINYIRA
(MRS), JSC<o:p></o:p>Both
the plaintiff-appellant-respondent (plaintiff) and the
Defendant-respondent-appellant (defendant) claimed title to the disputed land
situated at East Legon. The identity of the land was not in dispute. The trial
judge resolved the rival claims in favour of the defendant on grounds, inter
alia, that the defendant was able to establish his root of title through the La
Klanaa Quarter that owns the lands at Oteele-Bawaleshie of which the land in dispute
formed part. As to the issue of possession the trial judge held that the fact
that the plaintiff acquired the land in 1974 and erected walls did not mean she
was in effective possession as against the true owner as she was a mere
squatter. The trial judge also held that the mere fact that the plaintiff has
registered title deeds as against the defendant does not validate the
illegality since registered documents does not confer state guaranteed title to
the disputed land. <o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The Court of Appeal reversed the trial
judge holding that on the evidence the plaintiff has been in long uninterrupted
possession from 1974/75 until 1998, which is 23 years before Mallam Musa
challenged her title. As to the 1991 judgment of the Circuit Court that the La
Klanaa Quarter relied on to claim title to the land, the appellate court held
it was given 17 years after the plaintiff had been in possession; and that by
virtue of the operation of section 10 (6) of the Limitation Act, 1972 (NRCD54),
any title it had was extinguished after 12 years. So the appellate court held
that at the time Mallam Musa and subsequently the La Klanaa Quarter made their
grants to the Defendant they had no title to the land. The Defendant in turn
appealed to the Supreme Court from the judgment of the Court of Appeal on
grounds which would be set out in full when being considered in the course of
the judgment. <o:p></o:p>The Defendant submits that the Court of
Appeal erred when it based its judgment on the Limitation Act which was not
pleaded as required under Order 11 rule 8(1) of the High Court (Civil
Procedure) Rules, 2004 C.I. 47 <o:p></o:p>We are of the view that this case can
be decided on other grounds as indeed in this court, no judgment is upset on
the ground that its ratio is erroneous if there is another sound basis on which
it can be supported -per Apaloo J.A&nbsp; as
he then was in Seraphim v Amua-Sekyi
[1971]2 GLR 132 at 134<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>Validity
of the competing titles<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;There
is no doubt as to the identity of the land the subject matter in dispute on
which the Defendant has a completed house. It is clear from the evidence on
record that the Plaintiff in 1974 obtained a lease from Nii Odae Ayiku IV the
Nungua Mantse; and had registered her indenture at the Lands Registry in 1975.
The land was vacant and unoccupied and she enjoyed undisturbed possession for
24 years until the Defendant entered the land and rapidly put up a building on
it. <o:p></o:p>&nbsp;The Defendant on the other hand has no
registered document to the land he is laying claim. He conceded he made no
search at the Land Title Registry to ascertain whether the land was encumbered.
The evidence show that he first bought the land from Mallam Musah in September 1999,
at a time that he knew his vendor is litigating with Plaintiff over title and
recovery of the same land. He went for a fresh grant of the same plot from the
La Klanaa Quarter which transaction is evidenced by an unregistered document
dated 5 May 2004. This was after the Plaintiff has confronted Defendant, a
Deputy Commissioner for Human Rights and Administrative Justice, in his office for
trespass and an attempt at settlement had failed in 2002 and her counsel had
</main>