NII KWASHIE GBOLOR IV vs F. K. A. COMPANY LTD. , TRUSTEES OF CHRIST POWER ENCOUNTER INTERNATIONAL MINISTRY [2022]DLHC16414

NII KWASHIE GBOLOR IV vs F. K. A. COMPANY LTD. , TRUSTEES OF CHRIST POWER ENCO... [2022]DLHC16414

Date	2022-11-03
Suit No.	SUIT NO. LD/0397/2022
Citation No.	[2022]DLHC16414

HIS LORDSHIP K. A. GYIMAH.

CHARLES HABIAH FOR PLAINTIFF/ RESPONDENT.

IRENE MARIA ALLOTEY-ANNAN FOR 1ST DEFENDANT/ APPLICANT.

FRANCIS KWAME YEBOAH FOR 2ND DEFENDANT

[2022]DLHC16414
																																						<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" >NII KWASHIE GBOLOR IV <o:p></o:p>(PLAINTIFF/ RESPONDENT)<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>F. K. A. COMPANY LTD. <o:p></o:p>(1ST
DEFENDANT/APPLICANT)<o:p></o:p>TRUSTEES OF CHRIST POWER
ENCOUNTER INTERNATIONAL MINISTRY<o:p></o:p>(2ND
DEFENDANT)<o:p></o:p>[HIGH
COURT, 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: 0cm 0cm 1pt;">

SUIT NO. LD/0397/2022&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:
23RD NOVEMBER 2022<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL<o:p></o:p>CHARLES
HABIAH FOR PLAINTIFF/ RESPONDENT.<o:p></o:p>IRENE
MARIA ALLOTEY-ANNAN FOR 1ST DEFENDANT/ APPLICANT.<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: 0cm 0cm 1pt;">

</div>CORAM<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: 0cm 0cm 1pt;">

</div>&nbsp;<div style="border-top: none; border-right: none; border-left: none; border-image: initial; border-bottom-width: 1.5pt; border-bottom-color: windowtext; padding: 0cm 0cm 1pt;">

RULING<o:p></o:p>

</div>&nbsp;Introduction<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;On 1st November 2022, I
heard an application on notice seeking to dismiss the plaintiff’s action as an
abuse of process and I granted the said application and I adjourned the suit to
8th November 2022 to give my reasons for the ruling. I could however
not deliver the reasons on the said day but I am able to deliver the reasons today
23rd November 2022. I will therefore proceed to give my reasons for
the dismissal of the action.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;<span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:150%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,serif;
mso-fareast-font-family:&quot;Times New Roman&quot;;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Times New Roman&quot;;
mso-fareast-language:EN-GB">Relevance of Sarkodie v. FKA Co. Ltd. [2009] SCGLR
65<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;On 27th October 2008, the
Supreme Court in the matter FKA Company Ltd. v. Effah Sarkodie; Civil
Appeal No. J4/38/2007, gave judgment in respect of land containing an
approximate area of 95.194 acres situate at New Weija, Accra by declaring title
in favour of the plaintiff F. K. A. Company Ltd. (the 1st defendant
in this suit). In the said judgment, the Supreme Court affirmed the decision of
the Court of Appeal which had also affirmed the decision of the trial High
Court. The said judgment is a popular judgment and it has been reported as <span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:
150%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,serif;mso-fareast-font-family:&quot;Times New Roman&quot;;
mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Times New Roman&quot;;mso-fareast-language:EN-GB">Sarkodie v.
FKA Co. Ltd. [2009] SCGLR 65. It
is usually relied upon in support of the nemo
dat quod non habet principle.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;The applicant attached a copy of the
Supreme Court decision to the application as exhibit 10. On page 2 of the
judgment, Wood C. J., delivering the unanimous decision of the Supreme Court,
captured some of the facts of the case as follows:<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;“The defendant conversely denies the
plaintiff’s claim and asserts that he
acquired the property from his grantors the Ngleshie Amanfro stool who took him
to the chief of Weija Nii Anto Nyame II and his elders since they are ‘allied
families’ and the Weija Chief agreed to make a grant to him of the land. Defendant further says that he made an
initial payment to the Ngleshie Amanfro family and subsequently made
further payments to the Weija chief and his elders for the land.” [Emphasis mine.]<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;