WEST CROWN INVESTMENT CO. LTD. vs. EDMOND ADOM MALM AND STEPHEN YEBOAH [2015]DLCA6769

Date	2015-05-07
Suit No.	SUIT NO.: H1/74/201
Citation No.	[2015]DLCA6769

KANYOKE J.A. (PRESIDING)

ACQUAYE J.A.

WELBOURNE (MRS) J.A.

SOLOMON C. ESHUN FOR THE PLAINTIFF/APPELLANT

NANA K. NKRAKWA FOR THE DEFENDANTS/RESPONDENTS

[2015]DLCA6769
																																						<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" >WEST CROWN
INVESTMENT CO. LTD.<o:p></o:p>(PLAINTIFF/APPELLANT)<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>EDMOND ADOM
MALM AND STEPHEN YEBOAH<o:p></o:p>(DEFENDANTS/RESPONDENTS)<o:p></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">

<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:
justify;line-height:115%;border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in;mso-padding-alt:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">NANA K. NKRAKWA FOR THE
DEFENDANTS/RESPONDENTS <o:p></o:p>

KANYOKE J.A. (PRESIDING), ACQUAYE
J.A., WELBOURNE (MRS) J.A.<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">

</div>ACQUAYE,
J. A. <o:p></o:p>The
plaintiff/appellant issued a writ of summons in the High Court, Accra claiming:
<o:p></o:p>1.
An order to restrain the 1st Defendant from interfering with the construction
of the shop on property No. 155, Atomic Road, Haatso in Accra. <o:p></o:p>2.
An order for the 2nd Defendant to stop paying any money to the 1st Defendant. <o:p></o:p>3.
A declaration that the 2nd defendant pays any money to the 1st defendant at his
own risk.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;The plaintiff’s case was that on 1st January
2006 he signed an agreement with the 1st defendant by which he leased the
frontage of 1st defendant’s house at Haatso in Accra in order to build a 10
room store house within two (2) years. After construction of the storerooms the
plaintiff would give to the 1st defendant one storeroom on the ground floor and
another room on the first floor for 1st defendant’s use. The lease was to last
for 35 years after which the store house would revert to the 1st defendant. As
at July 2009 the plaintiff had completed the shops on the ground floor and had given
the 1st defendant possession of one store. On 10th July 2008 the 1st
defendant’s lawyer wrote to the plaintiff complaining of the plaintiff’s
failure to complete the construction of the storerooms within the two years
stipulated in the leasehold agreement and gave him four months to rectify the
breach. The plaintiff complained that his failure to complete the project
within time was due to the necessity to obtain the requisite building permits
and the 1st defendant and his son interfering in the plaintiff’s efforts to
obtain pre-financing of the project from prospective tenants. When the
plaintiff sued in 2009 for his claims the defendants denied interfering with
the payments of rent advances by the plaintiff’s prospective tenants but
complained of the plaintiffs failure to complete the construction of the 10
storerooms within two (2) years thus depriving him of the use of the second
storeroom. The 1st defendant counterclaimed for a declaration that the
plaintiff was in breach of the lease agreement and an order for the 1st
defendant to re-enter the property. <o:p></o:p>Before
hearing of the suit commenced the parties negotiated and filed terms of
settlement on 21st January 2011 which was adopted as consent judgment by the
trial court. The terms of settlement as entered by the trial court on 24th
January 2011 were <o:p></o:p>1. “Plaintiff shall continue and
complete the construction of the stores and offices within two years from the
date of filing these terms of settlement. <o:p></o:p>2. 1st defendant lost income because
of the inability of plaintiff to complete and allocate two offices to 1st
defendant on 2nd January 2008. The plaintiff is to compensate the 1st defendant
by paying 1st defendant One thousand and Five Hundred Ghana Cedis within two
weeks of filing these terms. <o:p></o:p>3. The lease shall be for thirty five
(35) years with effect from the execution of the lease agreement between 1st
defendant and plaintiff on 1st January 2006. At the end of the 35 years all the
stores and offices will revert to the 1st defendant without any encumbrances
and without renewal. <o:p></o:p>4. Plaintiff shall redesign and
construct the manhole in front of the store allocated to the 1st defendant so
it does not disturb and cause nuisance to the 1st defendant. <o:p></o:p>5. Plaintiff shall pay all arrears of
rent of Gh¢10.00 per annum from 1st January 2006 and continue to pay for the
term of the lease. <o:p></o:p>