AMOAKO BLANKSON vs. NANA BONSU, GABBAT CO. LTD. (NOW ASOMDWE CO. LTD AND ANDREWS AFRIYIE [2016]DLCA4554

AMOAKO BLANKSON vs. NANA BONSU, GABBAT CO. LTD. (NOW ASOMDWE CO. LTD AND ANDREW... [2016]DLCA4554

Date	2016-05-10
Suit No.	CIVIL APPEAL SUIT NO: H1/8/16
Citation No.	[2016]DLCA4554

E. K. AYEBI J.A (PRESIDING)

GERTRUDE TORKORNOO (MRS) J.A

ANGELINA M. DOMAKYAAREH (MRS) JA

[2016]DLCA4554
																																						<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" >AMOAKO BLANKSON<o:p></o:p>(PLAINTIFF/APPELLANT)<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>NANA BONSU, GABBAT CO.
LTD. (NOW ASOMDWE CO. LTD AND ANDREWS AFRIYIE&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <o:p></o:p>(DEFENDANTS/RESPONDENTS)<o:p></o:p>[COURT
OF APPEAL, KUMASI]<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">

CIVIL APPEAL SUIT NO: H1/8/16&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: 10TH MAY, 2016<o:p></o:p>

</div>CORAM: &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<o:p></o:p>E.
K. AYEBI J.A (PRESIDING), GERTRUDE TORKORNOO (MRS) J.A, ANGELINA M. DOMAKYAAREH
(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 0in 1.0pt 0in">

<p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="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:0in;mso-padding-alt:1.0pt 0in 1.0pt 0in">JUDGMENT<o:p></o:p>

</div>AYEBI, JA<o:p></o:p>1.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; This an appeal by the Plaintiff against
the judgment of a Kumasi Fast Track High Court dated 28th May, 2013.
Originally, the Plaintiff sued the 1st Defendant alone for the following
reliefs:<o:p></o:p>(a)&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; A declaration that he, being the
original allotee of the plot of land marked out as Plot No. 11 located on the
grounds of St. Joseph R.C. J.S.S, Suame and which plot was meant for the
construction of stores, the Defendant has no right to arbitrarily wrongly
allocate the said store to another person, so as to deprive the Plaintiff of
its use.<o:p></o:p>(b)&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Recovery of possession of the said space
or plot or any store built on the said plot No. 11<o:p></o:p>(c)&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Damages for trespass&nbsp; <o:p></o:p>(d)&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Perpetual injunction<o:p></o:p>2.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; The Plaintiff pleaded that he, the 1st
defendant and other traders and artisans were doing business on portions of the
St. Joseph Roman Catholic J.S.S land allocated to them by the school. To
promote their welfare, they formed a loose Union of which he and 1st defendant
were executive members. As a result of their appeal, the school authorities
permitted them to put up permanent structures on the portions they each occupied.<o:p></o:p>3.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; In order that the structures they will
put up will be uniform, 1st defendant decided to undertake the construction.
They all agreed to contribute ¢9 million each towards the construction. It was
also agreed amongst them that each person will occupy the store at the space or
land immediately behind the location of his kiosk or container.<o:p></o:p>4.&nbsp; The plaintiff says he paid a total sum of ¢4
million by installment and during the Christmas holidays he tendered the
balance of ¢5 million to the 1st defendant.&nbsp;
The 1st defendant refused to accept the balance because he had
re-allocated the store on plot No.11 which is behind his kiosk to another
person. When his protests failed, he sued the 1st defendant. <o:p></o:p>5.&nbsp; In his statement of defence, the 1st
defendant denied that the land on which the stores were built belonged to the
St. Joseph Roman Catholic J.S.S. Rather, the land is a lease from the Republic
of Ghana to Gabbat Company Limited and it was the company which collected money
from the other tenants to complete the stores when all attempts to get the
plaintiff to pay the balance of ¢5 million failed. But in a reply filed by the
plaintiff, he challenged the formation of the Gabbat Company Limited and the
leasing of the land to her as fraudulent. It was these allegations of
impropriety which made the company applied to be joined to the suit to clear its
name and avoid multiplicity of suits. The grant of the application made Gabbat
Company Limited the 2nd defendant in the suit.<o:p></o:p>6.&nbsp; Then pursuant to the grant of an application
for leave to amend the endorsement on the writ of summons, the plaintiff amended
the number of the store to read No. 12. Thereafter, the plaintiff obtained an
order restraining the 1st defendant and his assigns from entering store No. 12.
Upon the order, the store was locked up. <o:p></o:p>7.&nbsp; Since the restraint order affected Andrews
Afriyie in his pocket, he applied to the court to vacate the order which
affected him, a non-party to the action, without being heard. The court vacated
the injunction order subject to an undertaking by Andrews Afriyie to compensate
the plaintiff should he win the suit. This is how come Andrews Afriyie became
the third defendant in the suit.<o:p></o:p>8.&nbsp; So this is the case of the plaintiff against
the defendants: about 20 years ago, the teachers of St, Joseph School gave him
a place to trade. He said he placed a container on the land and sold spare
parts in it. He admitted the 1st defendant and other traders and artisans were
similarly doing business on portions of the land the school allowed them.
According to him the portion of the land on which he was trading is now store
No. 12. He also stated that the teachers were not owners of the land but
caretakers.<o:p></o:p>9.
In course of time, the oficials of Kumasi Metropolitan Assembly asked them to
vacate the land because they wanted to construct a wall to protect the school.
The occupants of the land pleaded with the officials of KMA to allow them to
construct the fence wall and then put up their own stores outside the wall and
it was agreed.<o:p></o:p>10.
Although each of them was to put up his own store, the 1st defendant suggested
that in order that the structure would be uniform, they should come together.
They agreed and permitted the 1st defendant to collect various sums of money
from them, construct the stores and handover to them.<o:p></o:p>