JAMES TOAH AGYARE (SUBSTITUTED BY BENJAMIN AYENSU) vs. SOLOMON OPARE ADDO QUAYNOR, TEYE OFOE AND REGINA L. A. GRAND SAWYER [2016]DLCA8434

JAMES TOAH AGYARE (SUBSTITUTED BY BENJAMIN AYENSU) vs. SOLOMON OPARE ADDO QUAYN... [2016]DLCA8434

Date	2016-10-26
Suit No.	SUIT NO: H1/04/2014
Citation No.	[2016]DLCA8434

ADJEI JA – PRESIDING

CECILIA H. SOWAH JA

L.L. MENSAH JA

MRS. ESI COBBINA FOR THE DEFENDANT/APPELLANTS

AND WITH HER IS DAVID DUODU ASARE ESQ.

ANDY APPIAH KUBI ESQ FOR THE PLAINTIFF/RESPONDENT

[2016]DLCA8434
																																						<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" >JAMES TOAH AGYARE (SUBSTITUTED BY BENJAMIN AYENSU)<o:p></o:p>(PLAINTIFF/RESPONDENT)<o:p></o:p><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,serif;
mso-fareast-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;
color:#00B0F0;mso-ansi-language:EN-GB">vs.<o:p></o:p>SOLOMON OPARE ADDO QUAYNOR, TEYE OFOE AND REGINA L. A. GRAND
SAWYER<o:p></o:p>(DEFENDANTS/
APPELLANTS)<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>[COURT OF APPEAL,
KOFORIDUA]<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">

SUIT NO: H1/04/2014&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; &nbsp;DATE: 26TH OCT, 2016<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:<o:p></o:p>MRS. ESI COBBINA FOR THE DEFENDANT/APPELLANTS <o:p></o:p>AND WITH HER IS DAVID DUODU ASARE ESQ.<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">

ANDY APPIAH KUBI ESQ FOR
THE PLAINTIFF/RESPONDENT<o:p></o:p>

</div><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:12.0pt;
line-height:115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,serif;mso-fareast-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;
mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;mso-ansi-language:EN-GB">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">

ADJEI
JA – PRESIDING, CECILIA H. SOWAH JA, L.L. MENSAH 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">

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

</div>ADJEI,
J.A:<o:p></o:p>The
Plaintiff sued the Defendants at the trial Circuit Court claiming for a declaration
of title, recovery of possession of the disputed land at Aburi Kitase, an order
for perpetual injunction and general damages.<o:p></o:p>The
Defendants disputed the Plaintiff’s claim. The Defendants in their amended
statement of defence filed pursuant to the order of the trial Circuit Court
granted on 23rd February, 2014 denied the Plaintiff’s claim and counterclaimed
against the Plaintiff for the same land. The Defendants in their paragraph 8
(a) of this statement of defence averred that the Plaintiff’s action is statute
barred and therefore not maintainable in law. The Defendants averred that the Plaintiff’s
claim is not maintainable in law by reason of the fact that the 1st Defendant
registered the land in accordance with law and has since been in undisturbed possession
of same for barely twenty years. The 1st Defendant’s further
counterclaimed for declaration of title, general damages for trespass and two
hundred Ghana cedis (GH¢200.00) specific damages being the value of the 1st
Defendant’s teak on the land which were destroyed by the Plaintiff.<o:p></o:p>The
trial Circuit Court heard the matter, gave judgment in favour of the Plaintiff
and dismissed the 1st Defendant’s counterclaim. The Defendants being
dissatisfied with the judgment of the trial Circuit Court filed an appeal
against same to this Court.<o:p></o:p>The
original grounds of appeal were two and they are as follows:<o:p></o:p>“a.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; That the judgment of the Honourable Court cannot be supported
having regard to the evidence.<o:p></o:p>b.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; That the Honourable court erred in law in deciding that the
title deeds of the appellant tendered as exhibits 2, 3, 4, and 5 were obtained
by fraud”.<o:p></o:p>On
26th April, 2016 this Court granted leave to the Defendants/Appellants
to amend his grounds of appeal and same was accordingly amended and filed
within time. The amended grounds of appeal are as follows:<o:p></o:p>“a.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; That
the judgment of the Honourable Trial Court is against the weight of evidence.<o:p></o:p>b.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; That the trial High court erred in holding that no concrete
evidence had been led by 1st Defendant to indicate that Plaintiff’s
action before the Court in respect of exhibit 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 (inclusive)
were statute barred.<o:p></o:p>c.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; That the trial judge erred in law in deciding suo motu, in
the absence of any evidence on the record that exhibits 2, 3, 4, and 5 were
obtained.<o:p></o:p>d.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; That the trial Judge failed to adequately examine the composite
plan submitted by the Defendant and therefore came to the wrong conclusions in
her findi</main>