REV. ERIC AMPOFO & ANOR. (PLAINTIFFS/RESPONDENTS) vs. JONES OFORI ATTA & ANOR. (DEFENDANTS/APPELLANTS) [2015]DLCA7482

REV. ERIC AMPOFO & ANOR. (PLAINTIFFS/RESPONDENTS) vs. JONES OFORI ATTA & ANOR. (... [2015]DLCA7482

Date	2015-03-26
Suit No.	CIVIL APPEAL NO. H1/14/2015
Citation No.	[2015]DLCA7482

OFOE JA (PRESIDING)

ADUAMA OSEI JA

WELBOURNE (MRS.) JA

[2015]DLCA7482
																																						<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" >REV. ERIC AMPOFO &amp; ANOR.<o:p></o:p>(PLAINTIFFS/RESPONDENTS)<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>JONES OFORI ATTA &amp; ANOR.<o:p></o:p>(DEFENDANTS/APPELLANTS)<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:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">

<p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;
text-align:center;line-height:115%;border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0cm;mso-padding-alt:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">CIVIL
APPEAL NO. H1/14/2015 &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &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,2015<o:p></o:p>

</div>CORAM:<o:p></o:p>OFOE
JA (PRESIDING), ADUAMA OSEI JA, WELBOURNE (MRS.) JA<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 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">

<p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;
text-align:center;line-height:115%;border:none;mso-border-top-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;padding:0cm;mso-padding-alt:1.0pt 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">JUDGMENT<o:p></o:p>

</div>ADUAMA
OSEI <o:p></o:p>In
this judgment, the Plaintiffs/Respondents will be called "the Plaintiffs", and the Defendants/Appellants will be
called "the Defendants". <o:p></o:p>By
their writ of summons issued in the Fast Track Division of the High Court,
Accra, on the 28th of January, 2013, the Plaintiffs sought an injunction order
to restrain the Defendants from entering upon or doing anything on a parcel of
land situate at Achimota in Accra, and containing an approximate area of 0.09
acre. They also claimed damages for trespass against the Defendants in respect
of the said parcel of land.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;In the statement of claim that accompanied the
writ of summons, the Plaintiffs asserted ownership of the disputed land and the
house constructed thereon and explained that the house had been constructed on
the land for them by the 1st Defendant under a building contract. They alleged
that even though the 1st Defendant had duly conveyed the disputed land with the
house thereon to them, the 2nd Defendant had been visiting the property and had
been claiming ownership of the same, alleging a purchase from the 1st Defendant
as the basis of his claim. The Plaintiffs disputed any claim to ownership of
the disputed property by the 1st or 2nd Defendant and contended that having
conveyed the property to them, the 1st Defendant had no power to sell the same
to the 2nd Defendant. They therefore claimed as a remedy, the reliefs indorsed
on their writ of summons.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;In his statement of defence, the 1st Defendant
admitted having been contracted by the Plaintiffs to build the disputed house
for them. He gave the cost of the building together with the land as
GH¢150,000.00, out of which the Plaintiffs had paid GH¢110,000.00. He explained
however that when he asked for the balance from the Plaintiffs, they asked him
to sell the property and pay their investment in it to them and he accordingly
procured the 2nd Defendant to purchase same. However, as the 1st Defendant
alleged, after the 2nd Defendant had purchased the property, the Plaintiffs
changed their minds about the sale and at the same time refused to pay the
balance outstanding on the cost of the building. He accordingly proceeded to
prepare documents on the disputed property for the 2nd Defendant and put him in
possession. The 1st Defendant went ahead to counterclaim for a declaration of
title to the disputed property, general damages, and an order declaring that
the Plaintiffs were only entitled to recovering the amount they paid to the 1st
Defendant for the property. <o:p></o:p>The
2nd Defendant stated in his statement of defence that the 1st Defendant was a
contractor who built houses for sale. He alleged that it was in the course of
the performance of this business that the 1st Defendant had sold the disputed
property to him. He contended that he was a bona fide purchaser of the property
and alleged that, since entering into possession, he had effected additions to
the property. The 2nd Defendant contended that the Plaintiffs were estopped
from denying that the disputed property belonged to him and he counterclaimed
against the Plaintiffs for an order ejecting them from the property, a
declaration that he was a bona fide purchaser of the property, perpetual
injunction in respect of the property, and special and general damages.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;The issues that were filed for determination
by the trial Court were:<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;"(a) Whether or not the 1st defendant was
vested with title to the property when he sought to sell same to the 2nd
defendant.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;"(b) Whether or not the plaintiffs are
entitled to their claim.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;"(c) Whether or not the defendants are
entitled to their counterclaims.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;"(d) Any other issues arising from the
pleadings".<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;In its judgment delivered on the 17th of
April, 2014, the trial Court held that, having transferred his interest in the
disputed property to the Plaintiffs, the 1st Defendant could not abrogate his
contract with the Plaintiffs. The trial Court then proceeded to dismiss the
Defendants’ counterclaims and to grant the Plaintiffs the restraining order
sought by them and damages against the 1st Defendant for "any anxiety that might have occasioned the plaintiffs for the
sale of the property in dispute". <o:p></o:p>Aggrieved
by the judgment of the trial Court, the 1st Defendant has appealed against the
same to this Court on the substantive grounds that:<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;"1. The learned trial judge erred and misdirected
herself when she held that the Plaintiffs were the owners of the house in the
face of clear evidence that they had directed the 1st Defendant to sell the
property on completion and as a result failed to pay the full cost of the
house. <o:p></o:p>"2. The judgment was
against the weight of evidence."<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;The judgment is at page 105 to page 112 of the
Appeal Record and the Notice of Appeal is at pages 113 and 114 of the Record. <o:p></o:p>