MOHAMMED ALHASSAN vs. AHMED MUMUNI AND SAMUEL MENSAH-LAMPTEY [2016]DLCA5551

Date	2016-07-21
Suit No.	CIVIL APPEAL NO: H1/69/2016
Citation No.	[2016]DLCA5551

KUSI-APPIAH JA (PRESIDING)

ADUAMA OSEI JA

KWOFIE JA

BLISS NEE AMARTEI FOR 1ST DEFENDANT/APPELLANT

ENID MARFUL-SAW FOR PLAINTIIF/RESPONDENT

[2016]DLCA5551
																																						<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" >MOHAMMED ALHASSAN<o:p></o:p>(PLAINTIFF/RESPONDENT)<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>AHMED MUMUNI AND SAMUEL
MENSAH-LAMPTEY<o:p></o:p>(1ST DEFENDANT/APPELLANT)<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">

CIVIL
APPEAL NO: H1/69/2016&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; 21ST JULY, 2016<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:<o:p></o:p>BLISS NEE AMARTEI FOR 1ST DEFENDANT/APPELLANT<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">

</div>CORAM: <o:p></o:p>KUSI-APPIAH
JA (PRESIDING), ADUAMA OSEI JA, KWOFIE 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="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;
text-align:center;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>ADUAMA OSEI<o:p></o:p>In this judgment, the Plaintiff/Respondent is referred
to as “the Respondent” and the 1st Defendant/Appellant is referred
to as “the Appellant”. The 2nd Defendant will continue to be
referred to as 2nd Defendant.<o:p></o:p>According to the statement of claim that
accompanied the writ of summons in this suit, the Respondent purchased the disputed
land together with the structures thereon from the 2nd Defendant
some time in 2007. The structures on the land at the time of the purchase were
a 3-room sandcrete building and a 3-room wooden structure. The Respondent says
that before he purchased the property, he did due diligence in respect of it
and satisfied himself that the land belonged to the 2nd Defendant,
that it had been plotted in his name, and that there was no adverse claim in
respect of it.<o:p></o:p>The Respondent also says after the purchase, he
took possession of the property and started re-developing the same. He removed
the wooden structure and also demolished part of the sandcrete structure, which
he re-modelled into a 2-room self-contained building with a kitchen and rest
rooms. He then started the construction of a 3-storey structure on another part
of the land and connected water and electricity to the property. The Respondent
says he moved into occupation of the property towards the end of 2007,
celebrated a Muslim marriage ceremony there in 2008, and brought 3rd
parties onto the same as his tenants. The Respondent carried out several other
acts of ownership in respect of the property and he, his family and his tenants
lived on it without any disturbance till some time in February, 2011, when the
Appellant caused them to be thrown out on the strength of a judgment of the
Circuit Court which had been obtained in January, 2007.<o:p></o:p>In response, the Appellant says in his statement of
defence that he had taken possession of the disputed property by lawful means.
He explains that 5 years before the Respondent claims to have purchased the
property, he had purchased the same from the 2nd Defendant and when
the 2nd Defendant was showing reluctance to convey the property to
him, he had obtained a judgment in January, 2007 against the 2nd
Defendant which confirmed his ownership. He says at the time the Respondent was
negotiating to purchase the property, the Respondent had been made aware of his
ownership of it and of the judgment he had obtained in respect of it. He says
it was out of intransigence that the Respondent proceeded to make payments to
the 2nd Defendant in respect of the property. <o:p></o:p>The 2nd Defendant however denies that he
had sold any land to the Appellant and rather confirms the acquisition alleged
by the Respondent. He states in his statement of defence that some time in
2002, a certain man, popularly called “Mallam” had negotiated to buy the
disputed property from him. He says the transaction with “Mallam” had however
fallen through and title to the disputed property remained in him at the time
he sold the property to the Respondent. He says he did not know the Appellant
in respect of the disputed property.<o:p></o:p>The issues which the trial Court considered
necessary to be addressed for a satisfactory determination of the case were:<o:p></o:p><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;
mso-fareast-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;">a)&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
Whether
or not the Appellant and the 2nd Defendant were parties to a sale
agreement in 2002.<o:p></o:p>