<p class="mb-5" id="contentDlCitation" hidden>[2015]DLHC3547</p> <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" ><span style="font-size: 18px !important;"><p class="MsoNoSpacing" align="center" style="text-align:center;line-height:115%"><b><span style="font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif"; color:#00B0F0">KWAME BAKALA<o:p></o:p></span></b></p><p class="MsoNoSpacing" align="center" style="text-align:center;line-height:115%"><b><span style="font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif"; color:#00B0F0">vs.<o:p></o:p></span></b></p><p class="MsoNoSpacing" align="center" style="text-align:center;line-height:115%"><b><span style="font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif"; color:#00B0F0">ERIC AMOAH BAMPO AND GRACE BOATEMAA<o:p></o:p></span></b></p><p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="text-align:center"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size: 10pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Book Antiqua", serif;"> [HIGH COURT (COMMERCIAL DIVISION), KUMASI]</span><b><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif"; mso-bidi-font-family:Tahoma"><o:p></o:p></span></b></p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt; padding:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in"> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" align="center" style="text-align:center;line-height:115%; border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;padding:0in; mso-padding-alt:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height: 115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif";mso-bidi-font-family:Tahoma">SUIT </span><span style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif"">NO.INTS/15/13 </span><span style="font-size: 10pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Book Antiqua", serif;">DATE: 19</span><sup><span style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height: 115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif";mso-bidi-font-family:Tahoma">TH</span></sup><span style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif"; mso-bidi-font-family:Tahoma"> JANUARY, 2015<o:p></o:p></span></p> </div><p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="line-height:115%"><b><span style="font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif";mso-fareast-font-family: "Book Antiqua"">COUNSEL: <o:p></o:p></span></b></p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt; padding:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in"> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="line-height:115%;border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt: solid windowtext 1.5pt;padding:0in;mso-padding-alt:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in"><span style="font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif"">MR. F.K. BUOR FOR DEFENDANT.<o:p></o:p></span></p> </div><p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="line-height:115%"><b><span style="font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif";mso-fareast-font-family: "Book Antiqua"">CORAM:</span></b><span style="font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif"; mso-fareast-font-family:Calibri;mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-latin"><o:p></o:p></span></p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt; padding:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in"> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="line-height:115%;border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt: solid windowtext 1.5pt;padding:0in;mso-padding-alt:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in"><span style="font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif"">HER LADYSHIP ANGELINA MENSAH-HOMIAH (MRS.) JUSTICE OF THE HIGH COURT</span><span style="font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif"; mso-fareast-font-family:Calibri"><o:p></o:p></span></p> </div><p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="line-height:115%"><span style="font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif""><o:p> </o:p></span></p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt; padding:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in"> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" align="center" style="text-align:center;line-height:115%; border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;padding:0in; mso-padding-alt:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in"><b><span style="font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif"">JUDGEMENT<o:p></o:p></span></b></p> </div><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; line-height:115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif";mso-ansi-language:EN-US">Kwame Bakala (the Defendant herein) obtained judgment against Eric Amoah Bampo in suit number RPC 146/2012, Commercial Court, Kumasi but he failed to satisfy the judgment debt. Consequently, a landed property numbered Plot PSU/BIX Suntreso; Kumasi was attached in execution of the judgment debt. Grace Boatemaa (the Plaintiff herein and mother of Eric Amoah Bampo) claimed an interest in the said property. This has brought about the instant interpleader proceedings.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; line-height:115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif";mso-ansi-language:EN-US">The court heard the case summarily. The claimant was made the Plaintiff and the Execution Creditor, the Defendant. The issues for consideration are: (i) whether or not the trustees of the Calvary Revival Mission can deal with the Church’s property in any manner without recourse to the church (ii) whether or not the signatures on the Statutory Declaration and Power of Attorney attributed to the Plaintiff were forged and (iii) whether or not the Plaintiff has any interest in the disputed property.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; line-height:115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif";mso-ansi-language:EN-US">This being a civil suit, the onus of proof lies first on the Plaintiff who has alleged that she has some interest in the property. The standard of proof, like in all land matters is very high. As far as the issue of forgery is concerned, proof must be to the standard required in criminal cases.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; line-height:115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif";mso-ansi-language:EN-US">The Plaintiff’s evidence was rather terse. She testified that the property in dispute belongs to the Calvary Revival Church and she is a Religious Minister of that church. She added that all documents on the said property are in the name of the church and given time, she can obtain copies from the Lands Commission. This became unnecessary because the Defendant tendered in evidence a copy of the Lease which the Plaintiff would have obtained from the Lands Commision. It was her testimony that she travelled to seek medical treatment and on her return, it came to her notice that her son by name Eric Amoah Bampo who lived with her had used the title documents as a collateral security in respect of a loan. She told the court that her son did so without her consent and that she would discuss with her church members to assist her to pay off the loan. She did not tender any document in support of her case.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; line-height:115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif";mso-ansi-language:EN-US"> On the part of the defendant, he testified that Eric Amoah Bampo applied for a loan and it was a condition that a security be provided. According to him, Eric Amoah Bampo produced a lease of the property in dispute, a power of attorney from the Plaintiff herein as well as his own statutory declaration to the effect that the Plaintiff had consented to the use of the said property as security. In cross-examination, the Defendant told the court that they compared the Plaintiff’s signature with that on other documents brought to them and were convinced that it was authentic but they did not deal with the Plaintiff directly. Four documents were tendered in evidence by the Defendant. These are: (1) A statutory declaration made by Grace Boatemaa; (2) A power of Attorney executed by Grace Boatemaa; (3) A photocopy of an indenture in respect of the disputed property and (4) A statutory declaration made by Eric Amoah Bampo. The Plaintiff has denied executing exhibits 1 and 2 but admits signing exhibit 4 (the Lease). <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; line-height:115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif";mso-ansi-language:EN-US">There is evidence on record which point to the fact that the disputed property is being held in Trust for the Calvary Revival Mission, North Suntreso, Kumasi. First, the lease which is in evidence was executed by the Plaintiff and one Kwasi Asenso as Trustees of the Calvary Revival Mission. Second, there is a deposition in paragraph 3 of exhibit 1 that the Plaintiff is one of the Trustees to all that H/No. Block “E” Plot B1 X North Suntreso, Kumasi. These two documents were in the Defendant’s possession at all times material to this action. It was the Defendant who actually tendered them in evidence. The Defendant testified in the English Language which implies that he is literate in that language. Exhibits 1 and 2 were prepared in the English Language. When these documents were given to the Defendant by Eric Amoah Bampo, the Defendant ought to have done due diligence to ensure that the trustees mentioned therein were in fact acting within their powers. The evidence before me suggests that upon the presentation of these documents by the said Eric Amoah Bampo, the Defendant, based on visual inspection of the signatures, advanced a relatively colossal amount of money to him without investigating the root of title of the alleged owner of the property.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; line-height:115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif";mso-ansi-language:EN-US">There is no evidence on record as regards the extent to which the beneficiary church permitted its trustees to deal with the property in issue. That notwithstanding, it is my considered opinion that the Trustees cannot legally convey the trust property or deal with it in a manner which is inconsistent with the objectives of the church or to the detriment of the church as has been done in this case. It is in this regard that the Defendant ought to have done due diligence to ascertain whether the trustees were acting legally. As the evidence stands now, the beneficiary church was never brought into the picture. There is unchallenged evidence on record that the Plaintiff is a prophetess of the Calvary Revival Mission and that she holds the property in trust for the said church. The Defendant has however failed to show that the legal and beneficial interest in the property is vested in the Plaintiff exclusively which may entitle her to deal with the property in any manner.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; line-height:115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif";mso-ansi-language:EN-US">Did the Plaintiff actually execute exhibits 1 and 2? Following the P</main>
