VOLTA RIVER AUTHORITY vs. HENRY YAO KLU AND 94 OTHERS [2018]DLCA4781

Date	2018-06-26
Suit No.	CIVIL APPEAL: H1/10/2017
Citation No.	[2018]DLCA4781

K. A. ACQUAYE JA (PRESIDING)

S. K. GYAN JA

M. M. AGYEMANG (MRS.) JA

MR. FRANCIS K. YEBOAH WITH MAJOR JOHN GYASI (RTD) FOR DEFENDANT/APPELLANT

MR. ERNEST GAEWU FOR PLAINTIFFS / RESPONDENTS

[2018]DLCA4781
																																						<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" >VOLTA RIVER AUTHORITY<o:p></o:p>(DEFENDANT/APPELLANT)<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>HENRY YAO KLU AND 94 OTHERS<o:p></o:p>(PLAINTIFFS
/ RESPONDENTS)<o:p></o:p>[COURT
OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION), HO]<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: H1/10/2017&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; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;DATE:
26TH JUNE, 2018<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:<o:p></o:p>MR. FRANCIS K.
YEBOAH WITH MAJOR JOHN GYASI (RTD) FOR 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">

<p class="MsoNormalCxSpMiddle" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-add-space:auto;text-align:justify;line-height:115%;border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt:
solid windowtext 1.5pt;padding:0in;mso-padding-alt:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">MR. ERNEST GAEWU FOR PLAINTIFFS / RESPONDENTS<o:p></o:p>

</div>CORAM:<o:p></o:p>K. A. ACQUAYE JA (PRESIDING), S. K. GYAN JA, M. M.
AGYEMANG (MRS.) 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="MsoNormalCxSpMiddle" 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>AGYEMANG
JA:<o:p></o:p>In this appeal against the judgment of the High
Court Ho, delivered on the 21st day of July 2015, the
defendant/appellant (hereafter referred to as the defendant) seeks the setting
aside of the judgment of the court below, and entry of judgment in favour of
the defendant. <o:p></o:p>These are the matters antecedent to the appeal.<o:p></o:p>Sometime in the 1970’s the defendant, in pursuance
of a project to extend electricity to the Volta Region, commenced engagement
with the local authorities in the Volta Region. In further pursuance of the
project, the defendant contacted persons who owned farms and buildings on land
situate at the following areas of the Volta Region: Mafi Asiakpe, through
Adaklu, to Ho and its environs.<o:p></o:p>Upon the understanding that the project would include
the construction of electricity transmission lines, that is, the passing of
high tension cables upon the erection of pylons, the owners of the farms and
buildings in the areas specified were notified that a right of way for the
purpose had been created through their lands. They were thus expected to yield
their land to the Government for the purpose, and be paid compensation. <o:p></o:p>So it was that the plaintiffs were paid
compensation, not for the land on which the transmission lines passed, but for
the damaged crops and buildings on the affected lands. The electrification
project was concluded in 1986. <o:p></o:p>In 2004, the plaintiffs commenced an action against
the defendant seeking an order for the lands belonging to the plaintiffs to be
valued for the payment of compensation to them. The court granted the order for
the valuation of the lands at the expense of the plaintiffs, without the
further order for the payment of compensation.<o:p></o:p>The parties then in 2007, commenced the instant suit
at the court below, seeking the following reliefs: the payment of the sum of GHC1,124,984.25,
being the amount found due upon the valuation of the land by the Land Valuation
Board, pursuant to the order of the court made in the earlier 2004 suit. The plaintiffs
also asked for the sum of GHC5,000 being the sum of money paid by the
plaintiffs for the said valuation to be carried out.<o:p></o:p>After pleadings were closed, the court, upon
application by the defendant, gave directions at the Application for Directions
stage for the issues arising out of the pleadings to be resolved by legal
arguments. The plaintiffs then amended their statement of claim to allege that their
lands were taken from them wrongfully without the proper compensation payable.
They contended that the Executive Instrument, requisite under the Lands
(Statutory Wayleave) Act, 1963, Act 186 was not passed to acquire the Government’s
right of way. &nbsp;Thus did the plaintiff’s
plead fraud against the defendant with the following particulars:<o:p></o:p>i.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
Fraudulently
representing to the plaintiffs and the general public that plaintiffs land have
[sic] been acquired by the President of Ghana in accordance with the Lands (Statutory
Wayleave) Act, 1963, Act 186;<o:p></o:p>ii.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
Making and
publishing a deceitful, dishonest and fraudulent representation when defendant
knew the same to be false, or did not have any reason to bel</main>