SOCIAL SECURITY & NATIONAL INSURANCE TRUST (SSNIT) vs. LANDS COMMISSION & 2 ORS [2021]DLCA16218

Date	2021-04-22
Suit No.	CIVIL APPEAL NO. H1/161/2019
Citation No.	[2021]DLCA16218

JUSTICE LAWRENCE L. MENSAH J.A. (PRESIDING)

JUSTICE ERIC BAAH J.A.

JUSTICE ADJEI FRIMPONG J.A.

HENRY ORRACA-TETTEH FOR PLAINTIFF/APPELLANT.

IRIS AGGREY-ORLEANS FOR 2ND DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT.

[2021]DLCA16218
																																						<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" >&nbsp;SOCIAL SECURITY &amp; NATIONAL INSURANCE TRUST (SSNIT) (PLAINTIFF/APPELLANT)<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>LANDS COMMISSION &amp;
2 ORS<o:p></o:p>(2ND
DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT)<o:p></o:p>[COURT OF APPEAL, ACCRA]<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 NO.H1/161/2019&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;DATE: 22ND APRIL, 2021<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:<o:p></o:p>HENRY
ORRACA-TETTEH 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;">

IRIS AGGREY-ORLEANS FOR 2ND
DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT.<o:p></o:p>

</div>CORAM: <o:p></o:p>JUSTICE
LAWRENCE L. MENSAH J.A. (PRESIDING), JUSTICE ERIC BAAH J.A., JUSTICE ADJEI
FRIMPONG J.A.<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="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;
text-align:center;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>LAWRENCE L. MENSAH, J.A.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; This
is an appeal against the judgment of the Land Division of the High Court, Accra
dated the 23rd day of April 2018 against Plaintiff/Appellant who
will be referred to as the Plaintiff, in favour of the 2nd
Defendant/Respondent who will be referred to as the 2nd Defendant.&nbsp; <o:p></o:p>&nbsp;Facts:<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; In
or about 1995, the Plaintiff entered into an Asset Swap Agreement (ASA) with
the Government of Ghana through the then Ministry of Works and Housing
represented by the 1st Defendant Lands Commission.&nbsp; The said Asset Swap Agreement was reduced
into writing by a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) signed by the Plaintiff and
the Government of Ghana on 4th January 2001. &nbsp;Under the said agreement, the Government
agreed to release some bungalows and bare lands situate variously at Ridge and
Cantonments to the Plaintiff in exchange for a number of executive bungalows at
Cantonments, Ridge, Kanda and Switch Back-Road, all in Accra.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; It
is the further case of the Plaintiff that it had performed its side of the
agreement by constructing and handing over to the Government six executive
bungalows at 6th Avenue, North Ridge, six executive bungalows at
Cantonments and forty-one 3-bedroom flats at Adenta with external
infrastructural facilities.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; The
Plaintiff further averred that though the Government could not fulfil all its
part of the agreement, it released bare lands or lands with buildings to the
Plaintiff at Site “A” situate at 6th and 7th Avenue
Ridge, Bare land developed into bungalows at Lands and Buildings known as Site
“B”; Land and Building known as Site “C” situate off 5th Circular
Road, Cantonments and Land and Buildings known as Plot No. 15, Ambassador Hotel
Planning Scheme Ridge. Accra.&nbsp; The
Plaintiff asserted that the disputed property is part of the land the
Government had granted to the Plaintiff.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; It
is the further assertion of the Plaintiff that since the 1st
Defendant Lands Commission was aware of the Asset Swap Agreement between the
Plaintiff and the Government, it was wrongful and fraudulent on the part of the
1st Defendant to have gone ahead to transfer the disputed land to
the 2nd Defendant.&nbsp; The
Plaintiff contended that the grant to the 2nd &nbsp;Defendant is null and void.&nbsp; That the Land Certificate issued in favour of
the 2nd Defendant by the 3rd Defendant Land Title
Registry should therefore be cancelled on grounds of fraud.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; It
is the further case of the Plaintiff that considering the fact that at the time
of the grant, the 2nd Defendant was Ghana’s ambassador to Denmark,
the transfer of the disputed land by the President of the Republic of Ghana
over the Plaintiff which was a statutory body constituted an abuse of office
and conflict of interest.&nbsp; It is the
contention of the Plaintiff that it was given possession of the disputed land
and it was given the right of entry by the 1st Defendant Lands
Commission.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; In
or about October 2008, the Plaintiffs security men noticed workmen who turned
out to be workers of the 2nd Defendant carrying out excavation work
on what the Plaintiff consid</main>