THE REGISTERED TRUSTEES, THE PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH OF GHANA MPRAESO-KWAHU vs. MR. KWAKU BAAH [2019]DLCA6350

THE REGISTERED TRUSTEES, THE PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH OF GHANA MPRAESO-KWAHU vs. MR.... [2019]DLCA6350

Date	2019-03-26
Suit No.	CIVIL APPEAL NO.: H1/27/2017
Citation No.	[2019]DLCA6350

F. G. KORBIEH JA (PRESIDING)

M. M. AGYEMANG (MRS.) JA

M. A. WOOD (MRS.) JA

JOYCE OPOKU BOATENG FOR PLAINTIFF / APPELLANT

KIN HUSSEIN ALHASSAN FOR DEFENDANT / RESPONDENT

[2019]DLCA6350
																																						<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" >THE
REGISTERED TRUSTEES, THE PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH OF GHANA MPRAESO-KWAHU<o:p></o:p>(APPELLANT)<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>MR. KWAKU
BAAH<o:p></o:p>(RESPONDENT)<o:p></o:p>[COURT OF APPEAL (CRIMINAL DIVISION),
KOFORIDUA]<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 NO.: H1/27/2017&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;DATE: 26TH
MARCH, 2019<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL: <o:p></o:p>JOYCE
OPOKU BOATENG FOR PLAINTIFF / 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">

KIN
HUSSEIN ALHASSAN FOR DEFENDANT / RESPONDENT<o:p></o:p>

</div>CORAM: <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">

F.
G. KORBIEH, JA (PRESIDING), M. M. AGYEMANG (MRS.), JA AND M. A. WOOD (MRS.), JA<o:p></o:p>

</div>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <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="MsoNormal" align="center" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;
text-align:center;line-height:115%;mso-outline-level:1;border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt:
solid windowtext 1.5pt;padding:0in;mso-padding-alt:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">JUDGMENT<o:p></o:p>

</div>AGYEMANG
(MRS.) JA:<o:p></o:p>In this appeal against the judgment of the High Court,
Nkawkaw, delivered on the 2nd of May 2008, the plaintiffs/appellants
herein seek the setting aside of the said judgment of the court below, as well
as the entry of judgment in their favour. <o:p></o:p>These are the matters antecedent to the instant
appeal. <o:p></o:p>Sometime in 1972 or 1975 (as the case may be), the
respondent herein, a lawyer, a native of Mpraeso Kwahu, and a member of the
Presbyterian Church, Mpraeso, Kwahu, approached the leaders of the church: the plaintiffs\appellants
herein, for the grant of a parcel of land. Having obtained the grant, the
respondent proceeded to develop same. Before the said development took place, a
draftsman, one of the leaders of the church went with the defendant/respondent and
one other from the church, to demarcate the land included in the grant to the
respondent. &nbsp;<o:p></o:p>The said draftsman, who gave evidence as PW1 in the
instant suit, sometime after the grant, produced a site plan of fourteen plots
covering the said grant, for the defendant/respondent. <o:p></o:p>It was the case of the plaintiffs/appellants (hereafter
referred to as the plaintiffs), that the grant consisted of two (2) plots of
land which grant followed a request for four (4) plots of land made by the
defendant/respondent (defendant) to the plaintiffs. The said parcel of land included
in the grant was allegedly to be used for residential purposes only. <o:p></o:p>It was the case of the plaintiffs that sometime
after the grant, it having come to their notice that the defendant had put up
three residential houses, as well as cultivated fruits, spices, and teak trees
on fourteen plots instead of the two plots allegedly granted to him, invited
him for a meeting. The plaintiffs alleged that the defendant spurned all
invitations extended to him, to meet with them on the subject of his alleged encroachment
on additional land belonging to the plaintiffs. &nbsp;<o:p></o:p>Thus did the plaintiffs commence suit at the court
below seeking inter alia, &nbsp;the following declaratory reliefs: a declaration that the plaintiffs were
the lessees of all that piece or parcel of land described under an attached
schedule; a declaration that plaintiffs granted two plots of land measuring
200’ by 200’ within the larger piece or parcel of land contained in the plaintiffs’
said leasehold property; a declaration that defendant had trespassed unto additional
land, making up fourteen plots (more or less) of plaintiffs’ said land which
had not been granted to defendant by plaintiffs.<o:p></o:p>The plaintiffs also sought recovery of possession
of all the fourteen plots or any other additional plots unlawfully annexed to
the two plots by the defendant, as well as damages for trespass. <o:p></o:p>It was the defendant’s case that he had in fact
been granted all the land he had had taken possession of, and developed at
considerable expense - fourteen plots of land. It was his evidence that the
plaintiffs did not in fact measure out any land for him, but asked him to take
the Atani lands on the hill. In this regard, the defendant testified that on
the day the leaders of the church (the plaintiffs) sent two persons, to go with
him to carve out a portio</main>