ALHAJI MUMUNI V. AKUA SERWAA NYAMEKYE, YAA TENEWAA, LANDS COMMISSION, REGISTRAR, LANDS COMMISSION AND EXECUTIVE SECRETARY, LANDS COMMISSION [2017]DLSC2077

ALHAJI MUMUNI V. AKUA SERWAA NYAMEKYE, YAA TENEWAA, LANDS COMMISSION, REGISTRAR,... [2017]DLSC2077

Date	2017-04-06
Suit No.	CIVIL APPEAL NO. J4/1/2015
Citation No.	[2017]DLSC2077

YEBOAH JSC (PRESIDING)

BAFFOE-BONNIE JSC

GBADEGBE JSC

APPAU JSC

PWAMANG JSC

NANA KWASI BOAITEY FOR THE DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT/APPELLANT

SAMANI ZAKARI FOR THE PLAINTIFF/APPELLANT/RESPONDENT

[2017]DLSC2077
																																						<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" >ALHAJI
MUMUNI<o:p></o:p>V.<o:p></o:p>AKUA SERWAA
NYAMEKYE, YAA TENEWAA, LANDS COMMISSION, REGISTRAR, LANDS COMMISSION AND
EXECUTIVE SECRETARY, LANDS COMMISSION<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">

&nbsp;[SUPREME COURT, ACCRA]<o:p></o:p>

CIVIL
APPEAL NO. J4/1/2015&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; &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: 6TH APRIL, 2017<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:&nbsp;&nbsp; <o:p></o:p>NANA
KWASI BOAITEY FOR THE DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT/APPELLANT.<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">

SAMANI
ZAKARI FOR THE PLAINTIFF/APPELLANT/RESPONDENT.<o:p></o:p>

</div>CORAM: <o:p></o:p>YEBOAH
JSC (PRESIDING), BAFFOE-BONNIE JSC, GBADEGBE JSC, APPAU JSC AND PWAMANG JSC<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 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">

<p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;
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:0cm;mso-padding-alt:1.0pt 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">JUDGEMENT&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <o:p></o:p>

</div><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>GBADEGBE,
JSC:- [Read the unanimous
decision of the court]<o:p></o:p>My lords and respectful brethren, the question for
our determination in this appeal turns on whether the decision of the Court of Appeal
in upholding the plaintiff’s writ was in accordance with the settled practice
of the court and also whether there were legitimate grounds for the Court of Appeal
to reverse the decision of the trial court on the disputed questions of fact?
In this delivery, the parties will conveniently be referred to by the
designation which they bore in the trial court.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>As the question raised by the appellant concerning
the validity of the writ affects the jurisdiction of the trial court in the
matter, I would turn my immediate attention to it. I have carefully considered
the respective briefs of the parties to the appeal herein and the record of
appeal before us and have reached the conclusion that as the right of the
plaintiff to the order of perpetual injunction was resisted by the 2nd defendant
who also counterclaimed for a declaration of title to the disputed property,
the plaintiff was required to prove his title to the property and consequently
there was before the court a claim that was substantive in nature. It is well
established without any conflict of opinion that a court cannot consider the
plaintiff’s right to a permanent injunctive relief without first considering
the right on which such a claim is based. In my view therefore, the writ, which
was taken out by the plaintiff in the action herein on May 02, 1986 was
competent.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>Although generally, an injunction may not be
granted for actionable wrongs where damages would suffice as adequate remedy,
there are situations in which the wrong is irreparable and or in respect of a
contact or agreement which is ‘sui generis’ such as that for the purchase of a
building as in the case before us. In such cases, a court may intervene at law
if the right to the remedy is clearly established from the evidence placed
before the court. Describing the cases in which the court will intervene to
grant injunctive reliefs, the learned authors in Halsbury’s Laws of England,
Fourth edition para 926 at page 522 state as follows:<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>“By Irreparable injury” is meant injury which is substantial and could
never be adequately remedied or atoned for by damages.” <o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>&nbsp;It appears
from the authorities that the fact that the plaintiff may have a right to be
awarded damages is no objection to the court’s exercise of the jurisdiction to grant
an injunction in his favor. See: (1) Bloxam
v Metropolitan Rly Co (1868)&nbsp; 3 Ch.
App 337 at 354; (2) Colls v Home and
Colonial Stores Ltd[1904] AC 179 at 188.In the action with which we are
concerned in these proceedings, the plaintiff sought the injunctive reliefs to
prevent the 1st defen</main>