REV. ERIC AMPOFO AND MRS. JUDITH AMPOFO vs. JONES OFORI ATTA AND MAXWELL ABOAGYE FRIMPONG [2015]DLCA8322

REV. ERIC AMPOFO AND MRS. JUDITH AMPOFO vs. JONES OFORI ATTA AND MAXWELL ABOAGYE... [2015]DLCA8322

Date	2015-03-26
Suit No.	CIVIL APPEAL NO. H1/14/2015
Citation No.	[2015]DLCA8322

OFOE JA (PRESIDING)

ADUAMA OSEI JA

WELBOURNE (MRS.) JA

[2015]DLCA8322
																																						<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 AND MRS. JUDITH AMPOFO&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; (PLAINTIFFS/RESPONDENTS)<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>JONES
OFORI ATTA AND MAXWELL ABOAGYE FRIMPONG&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
&nbsp; (DEFENDANTS/APPELLANTS)<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: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;DATE: 26TH
MARCH, 2015<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:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">

OFOE JA (PRESIDING),
ADUAMA OSEI JA, WELBOURNE (MRS.) JA<o:p></o:p>

</div>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <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">

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><o:p>&nbsp;</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 <st1:metricconverter productid="0.09 acre" w:st="on">0.09
 acre</st1:metricconverter>. They also claimed damages for trespass against the
Defendants in respect of the said parcel of land.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>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><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>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><o:p>&nbsp;</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><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The
issues that were filed for determination by the trial Court were:<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>“(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><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>