NAAS ARTHUR BOATENG vs. MADAM ESTHER FREMAN BOATENG AND VICTOR BRIGHT ASARE [2018]DLCA16204

Date	2018-12-18
Suit No.	CIVIL APPEAL SUIT NO: H1/48/18
Citation No.	[2018]DLCA16204

ADUAMA OSEI JA (PRESIDING)

DZAMEFE JA

M. WELBOURNE JA

MARSHALL BELIEB FOR PLAINTIFF/APPELLANT.

OBENG MANU JNR. FOR DEFENDANTS/RESPONDENTS.

[2018]DLCA16204
																																						<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" >NAAS ARTHUR BOATENG <o:p></o:p>(PLAINTIFF/APPELLANT)<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>MADAM ESTHER FREMAN BOATENG AND VICTOR BRIGHT ASARE<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;(DEFENDANTS/RESPONDENTS)<o:p></o:p>[COURT
OF APPEAL, KUMASI]<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: 0in 0in 1pt;">

CIVIL
APPEAL SUIT NO: H1/48/18&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;DATE: 18TH DECEMBER, 2018<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:<o:p></o:p>MARSHALL BELIEB FOR
PLAINTIFF/APPELLANT.<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: 0in 0in 1pt;">

OBENG MANU JNR. FOR
DEFENDANTS/RESPONDENTS.<o:p></o:p>

</div>CORAM:
<o:p></o:p>ADUAMA OSEI JA (PRESIDING), DZAMEFE JA,
M. WELBOURNE JA<o:p></o:p><div style="border-top-width: 1.5pt; border-top-color: windowtext; border-left: none; border-bottom-width: 1.5pt; border-bottom-color: windowtext; border-right: none; padding: 1pt 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>&nbsp;DZAMEFE,
JA<o:p></o:p>The Plaintiff/Appellants hereinafter
referred to as the plaintiff is a Ghanaian who operates a bar and restaurant
services under the name and style of “Bar Naas” at Nhyiaeso Kumasi.&nbsp; The Defendant/Respondents also live in Kumasi
and work at the True Vine Lodge/Hotel.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;The plaintiff said by a
Landlord-Tenant Agreement the 1st defendant allowed her to take the
subject premises for use as a commercial bar and restaurant effective 1st
January 2007. The said premises include an open space and a store room (shop)
and is located at plot 15A Block ‘F’.&nbsp; Nhyiaeso,
Kumasi.&nbsp; The plaintiff averred further
that she has fully paid the agreed rent advance of Gh¢8000 to the 1st
defendant and has the option to renew on fresh terms should the tenancy
expire.&nbsp; She said even though the
agreement guaranteed her quiet possession and enjoyment of the premises, the 1st
defendant and her assigns have repeatedly subjected her activities at the
premises with “subtle as well as violent
interruptions on various occasions, for no justifiable reason.”For example,
on one occasion the 1st defendant drove her vehicle carelessly
without due care and attention into and through the plaintiff’s business area
causing various degrees of damage to her properties and thereby disrupted all
business activities for a considerable length of time.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;On one occasion the 1st
defendant without any notice to the plaintiffunilaterally and violently cut down
a tree that provides shade to her customers.&nbsp;
The customers had to run for safety abandoning their drinks and meals.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;Plaintiff averred further that
recently 2nd defendant who is 1stdefendant’s son broke
down sections of the wooden structure of the plaintiff’s business yard and also
locking up plaintiff’s shop which forms part and parcel of the subject premise
where she conducts her ‘bar’ service activities and same remains under lock and
key at the behest of the defendants.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;Plaintiff claims that though her
interest and rights in the subject premise is subsisting, the defendant’s will
not grant her the peace and quietness to conduct her business as 1st
defendant undertook to do unless this court restrains them from interfering or
interrupting with her business activities.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;The plaintiff says thatthe defendant’s
actions have caused her to loose revenue, customers, business orders and opportunities
yet the defendant’s will not compensate her adequately unless ordered todo so
bythe court.&nbsp; Plaintiffcontends she is
entitled to be compensated with her daily earnings for the day her services
were interrupted and shops illegally locked up bythe defendants until the court
ordered same tobe re-opened.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;The Plaintiff says the defendants said
action are illegal, unwarranted and a recipe for the breach of the peace if not
stopped timeously by the court, wherefore the plaintiff claims for the
following: -<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;a.<span style="font-variant-numeric: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-kerning: auto; font-optical-sizing: auto; font-feature-settings: normal; font-variation-settings: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-family: &quot;Times New Roman&quot;;">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; A declaration that the deed of tenancy
between the parties executed on the 13th of November 2006 is still
subsisting.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;b.<span style="font-variant-numeric: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-kerning: auto; font-optical-sizing: auto; font-feature-settings: normal; font-variation-settings: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-family: &quot;Times New Roman&quot;;">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; A declaration that the defendants
unilateral acts of subtly and violently interfering/interruption with the
business activities of the plaintiff at the subject premises on various
occasions, constitute a breach of the tenancy agreement between the parties.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;c.<span style="font-variant-numeric: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-kerning: auto; font-optical-sizing: auto; font-feature-settings: normal; font-variation-settings: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-family: &quot;Times New Roman&quot;;">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <span</main>