FELIX OTOO {PLAINTIFF} vs. SOCIAL SECURITY AND NATIONAL INSURANCE TRUST [2018]DLHC6284

Date	2018-04-19
Suit No.	Suit No. RPC/87/15
Citation No.	[2018]DLHC6284

JENNIFER DODOO (MRS)

MELISSA AMARTEIFIO FOR PLAINTIFF

JOSEPH H. APPIAH FOR DEFENDANT

[2018]DLHC6284
																																						<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" >FELIX OTOO<o:p></o:p>{PLAINTIFF}<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>SOCIAL SECURITY AND
NATIONAL INSURANCE TRUST<o:p></o:p>{DEFENDANT}<o:p></o:p>[HIGH
COURT (COMMERCIAL DIVISION), ACCRA]<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">

Suit No. RPC/87/15&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &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: 19TH APRIL 2018<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:<o:p></o:p>MELISSA
AMARTEIFIO FOR PLAINTIFF<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">

JOSEPH
H. APPIAH FOR DEFENDANT<o:p></o:p>

</div>CORAM:&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <o:p></o:p>JENNIFER
DODOO (MRS) JUSTICE OF THE HIGH COURT<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="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>Expiration of lease<o:p></o:p>Whether or not holding onto keys meant
Defendant was still in actual possession of premises,<o:p></o:p>Mesne Profits and how calculated<o:p></o:p>The
Plaintiff’s claim in his Amended Writ and Statement of Claim was for an amount
of $644,000.00 or its cedi equivalent being the economic rent for his property
together with interest from November 2010 until date of final payment.&nbsp; The Plaintiff also sued for damages and costs
but later abandoned its claim for damages.<o:p></o:p>It
was the Plaintiff’s case that the land in question was devised to one Frank
Narteh Tawiah Otoo and his brothers in joint tenancy.&nbsp; On the demise of the last beneficiary under
the will i.e. Frank Otoo, the property vested in him i.e. the Plaintiff. He
stated further that his predecessors in title granted an assignment on 7th
June 1960 to one Mr. Nakib who in turn assigned the unexpired residue of his term
to the Defendant.<o:p></o:p>The
Plaintiff stated further, that in early 2010, he informed the Defendant that
the lease was about to expire.&nbsp; The
Defendant in turn expressed the intention of either extending the lease or
purchasing the property outright.&nbsp;
However negotiations broke down. According to the Plaintiff, the
Defendant remained in possession of the property from November 2010 to August
2014 without paying any rent.&nbsp; The
Defendant is also said to have left the premises in a state of disrepair.<o:p></o:p>The
Plaintiff contended that a valuation of the property pegged the rent for the
premises at $14,000.00 a month.<o:p></o:p>The
Defendant in its defence stated that it began to negotiate with the Plaintiff
but negotiations broke down due to intra family feuds and protracted litigation
over title to the property.&nbsp; They
therefore questioned Plaintiff’s capacity to mount the instant suit. It was
their case that once their initial term expired in 2010 they vacated the
property and handed over same to the Plaintiff.&nbsp;
They therefore denied being liable for the instant claim.<o:p></o:p>The
following issues were set for trial:<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p><ol style="margin-top:0in" start="1" type="1">
 <li class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify;line-height:115%;mso-list:l1 level1 lfo1">Whether
 or not Defendants were in possession of the property from November 2010 to
 August 2014 without paying rent?<o:p></o:p></li>
 <li class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify;line-height:115%;mso-list:l1 level1 lfo1">Whether
 or not the Defendant owes the Plaintiff rent from November 2010 to August
 2014?<o:p></o:p></li>
 <li class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify;line-height:115%;mso-list:l1 level1 lfo1">Whether
 or not the Plaintiff is entitled to levy any rent at all from Defendant
 from the time the Defendant vacated the premises after its tenure?<o:p></o:p></li>
 <li class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify;line-height:115%;mso-list:l1 level1 lfo1">Whether
 or not there was a pending suit between the Plaintiff and other parties
 for the determination of the rightful owner at the time the Defendant
 vacated the premises?<o:p></o:p></li>
 <li class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify;line-height:115%;mso-list:l1 level1 lfo1">Whether
 or not the Defendant was in possession during the negotiations between the
 parties for the sale of the property?<o:p></o:p></li>
 <li class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify;line-height:115%;mso-list:l1 level1 lfo1">Whether
 or not the Plaintiff is entitled to his claim <o:p></o:p></li>
</ol>The
court notes that issues (1), (2), (3) and (5) deal with whether the Defendants were
in possession of the property from November 2010 to August 2014 and whether or
not rent was paid for that period.<o:p></o:p>The
court notes from the evidence on record that there was a series of litigation
over the property, subject matter of this dispute.&nbsp; The High Court which was the court of first
instance delivered its judgment in the case of Norah Otoo and 2 others v.
Reubin Otoo and 4 Others on 26th October 2009.&nbsp; The 3rd Plaintiff (who is the
Plaintiff herein) prosecuted the suit on behalf of the 3 Plaintiffs and
judgment was given in their favour. (See exhibit C)&nbsp; This judgment was set aside by the Court of
Appeal on 23rd May 2013.<o:p></o:p>On
17th July 2014, the Supreme Court allowed the </main>