NII OKWEI KINKA DOWUONA VI vs. THE TRUSTEES OF THE GHANA ASSOCIATION OF THE CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST OF LATTERDAY SAINTS [2017]DLHC16427

NII OKWEI KINKA DOWUONA VI vs. THE TRUSTEES OF THE GHANA ASSOCIATION OF THE CHU... [2017]DLHC16427

Date	2017-11-10
Suit No.	SUIT NO. LD/0722/2017
Citation No.	[2017]DLHC16427

HIS LORDSHIP K. A. GYIMAH

KWAME FOSU-GYEABOUR FOR PLAINTIFF/RESPONDENT

GOLDA DENYO FOR DEFENDANT/APPLICANT

[2017]DLHC16427
																																						<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" >NII OKWEI KINKA DOWUONA VI
<o:p></o:p>(PLAINTIFF/ RESPONDENT)<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>THE TRUSTEES OF THE GHANA
ASSOCIATION OF THE CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST OF LATTERDAY SAINTS <o:p></o:p>(DEFENDANT/ APPLICANT)<o:p></o:p>[HIGH
COURT, ACCRA]<o:p></o:p><div style="border-top: none; border-right: none; border-left: none; border-image: initial; border-bottom-width: 1.5pt; border-bottom-color: windowtext; padding: 0cm 0cm 1pt;">

SUIT NO. LD/0722/2017&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:
10TH&nbsp;NOVEMBER 2017<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL<o:p></o:p>KWAME
FOSU-GYEABOUR FOR PLAINTIFF/RESPONDENT<o:p></o:p><div style="border-top: none; border-right: none; border-left: none; border-image: initial; border-bottom-width: 1.5pt; border-bottom-color: windowtext; padding: 0cm 0cm 1pt;">

</div>CORAM<o:p></o:p><div style="border-top: none; border-right: none; border-left: none; border-image: initial; border-bottom-width: 1.5pt; border-bottom-color: windowtext; padding: 0cm 0cm 1pt;">

</div><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p><div style="border-top: none; border-right: none; border-left: none; border-image: initial; border-bottom-width: 1.5pt; border-bottom-color: windowtext; padding: 0cm 0cm 1pt;">

RULING<o:p></o:p>

</div>The plaintiff is the occupant of the Osu Stool and he brings this action
for and on behalf of the said stool.&nbsp; It
is the plaintiff’s case that the land in dispute is part of Osu Stool lands
which fact was also confirmed by a Deed of Exchange executed between the
Colonial Government and the Osu Stool in 1930.&nbsp;
The said Deed of Exchange acknowledged the right of the Osu Stool to
alienate Osu Stool lands including the land in dispute.&nbsp; <o:p></o:p>&nbsp;The plaintiff asserts that his predecessors in title alienated the said
land to Union Trading Company Limited (UTC) of Basel, Switzerland in 1936.&nbsp; The said company constructed buildings on the
property but has subsequently left Ghana.&nbsp;
The plaintiff asserts that the defendant without his consent and
authority has entered the land, demolished the buildings constructed by UTC and
is now developing the land ‘at a very fast rate’. The plaintiff further asserts
that the defendant’s activities on the land are unlawful and he therefore
claims the following reliefs against the defendant:<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;<ol style="margin-top:0cm" start="1" type="1">
 <li class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;text-align:justify;line-height:
 150%;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1">A
 declaration that the land in dispute forms part of Osu Stool lands.<o:p></o:p></li>
 <li class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;text-align:justify;line-height:
 150%;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1">A
 declaration that the defendant had no interest in the land in dispute.<o:p></o:p></li>
 <li class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;text-align:justify;line-height:
 150%;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1">An order
 to defendant to pay the full current market value of the land to plaintiff
 stool for regularization on the land in dispute, failure of which
 plaintiff would be entitled to recover possession.<o:p></o:p></li>
 <li class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;text-align:justify;line-height:
 150%;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1">General
 damages.<o:p></o:p></li>
 <li class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;text-align:justify;line-height:
 150%;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1">Cost.<o:p></o:p></li>
</ol>&nbsp;The defendant duly entered appearance and filed a defence. It is the
defendant’s case that the alienation of the land in dispute by the plaintiff’s
predecessors in title to UTC in 1936 was a conveyance in fee simple and as such
the Osu Stool no longer has any right to, or interest in the land that was
conveyed to UTC in 1936. The defendant further asserts that it has a valid
lease on the land in dispute and has not entered the land unlawfully to
undertake any construction works on the land.&nbsp;
The defendant therefore asserts that the plaintiff is not entitled to
the reliefs endorsed on the writ of summons.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;