MADAM RANDI LARTEY, SAMUEL NII OTOO ANKRAH AND MRS AGNES ESI ANKRAH vs. YAW ABOAH DJIN AND JUSTINY COMPANY LIMITED [2022]DLSC11707

MADAM RANDI LARTEY, SAMUEL NII OTOO ANKRAH AND MRS AGNES ESI ANKRAH vs. YAW ABO... [2022]DLSC11707

Date	2022-06-29
Suit No.	CIVIL APPEAL NO. J4/40/2022
Citation No.	[2022]DLSC11707

PWAMANG JSC (PRESIDING)

DORDZIE (MRS.) JSC

AMEGATCHER JSC

PROF. KOTEY JSC

TORKORNOO (MRS.) JSC

NAA DJAMAH AYIKOI OTTO ESQ. FOR THE 1ST AND 2ND PLAINTIFFS/RESPONDENTS/APPELLANTS.

OSEI AKOTO APPIAH ESQ. FOR THE 1ST DEFENDANT/APPELLANT/ RESPONDENT.

[2022]DLSC11707
																																						<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" >MADAM RANDI LARTEY, SAMUEL NII OTOO
ANKRAH AND MRS AGNES ESI ANKRAH&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <o:p></o:p>(PLAINTIFF/RESPONDENT/APPELLANT)<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>YAW ABOAH DJIN AND JUSTINY COMPANY
LIMITED<o:p></o:p>(DEFENDANT/APPELLANT/RESPONDENT)<o:p></o:p>[SUPREME 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;">

<p class="MsoNormalCxSpMiddle" align="center" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:
.0001pt;mso-add-space:auto;text-align:center;line-height:115%;border:none;
mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;padding:0cm;mso-padding-alt:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">CIVIL APPEAL NO. J4/40/2022&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;DATE:
29TH JUNE, 2022<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL<o:p></o:p>NAA DJAMAH AYIKOI
OTTO ESQ. FOR THE 1ST AND 2ND PLAINTIFFS/RESPONDENTS/APPELLANTS.<o:p></o:p>OSEI AKOTO APPIAH
ESQ. FOR THE 1ST DEFENDANT/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: 0cm 0cm 1pt;">

<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:
justify;line-height:115%;border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0cm;mso-padding-alt:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">RESPONDENT.<o:p></o:p>

</div>CORAM&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <o:p></o:p>PWAMANG JSC
(PRESIDING), DORDZIE (MRS.) JSC, AMEGATCHER JSC, PROF. KOTEY JSC, TORKORNOO
(MRS.) JSC<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 0cm;">

<p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;
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:0cm;mso-padding-alt:1.0pt 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">JUDGMENT<o:p></o:p>

</div>&nbsp;AMEGATCHER JSC:-<o:p></o:p>INTRODUCTION<o:p></o:p>This suit commenced in the Land Division of the
High Court where both parties claimed to have obtained the property, the subject
matter of the dispute, from the same grantor. After a full trial, the High
Court gave judgment in favour of the plaintiffs in respect of all of their
reliefs. On 16th May 2019, the Court of Appeal allowed the 1stdefendant’s
(hereafter called the respondent) appeal and set aside the High Court Judgment.
Aggrieved by the Court of Appeal judgment, the 2nd and 3rd plaintiffs
(hereafter called the appellants) have appealed to this Court. Despite the multiple
issues raised in the initial claim, the appeal before this Court has been mainly
narrowed down to the issue of bonafide
purchaser for value without notice and the respondent’s counterclaim.<o:p></o:p>FACTS<o:p></o:p>The 1st plaintiff claimed that per two deeds of
assignment from the 2nd defendant dated 25th May 2008 and 27th
May 2008, she was assigned two parcels of land at Prampram measuring 25.97
acres and 24.33 acres, respectively. The 1st plaintiff, on 1st
January 2010, assigned her interest in these two parcels of land to the appellants.
The appellants subsequently presented their documents to the Land Title
Registry for processing and were issued a yellow card dated 29th
March 2010. The appellants averred that after the grant, they went into
possession of the property and remained in quiet, peaceful, and undisturbed
possession until May 2011 when the respondent trespassed on the property. The appellants
also stated that the Land Certificate issued to the respondent was procured by
fraud and that they are purchasers for value without any notice of defect in
the 1st plaintiff’s title.<o:p></o:p>The Respondent who was originally the only Defendant
until he joined the 2nd defendant to the suit, denied that the 2nd defendant
had assigned the property in dispute to the 1st plaintiff. According to the respondent,
he entered into a contract of sale dated 22nd March 2007 with the 2nd
defendant for the sale of a parcel of land at Prampram measuring 76.41 acres. Pursuant
to the contract of sale, the 2nd defendant registered its interest in the land
at the Land Title Registry, obtained a land certificate, and subsequently
transferred its registered interest to the respondent. Consequently, the respondent
was issued a land certificate dated 4th April 2008.The respondent
claimed that he was in physical possession of the land and that the appellants had
rather trespassed on his land by using police to evict his security men. He,
therefore, reported the matter to the Property Fraud Unit at the Police
Headquarters and furnished the police with copies of his land certificate as
proof of ownership. The respondent also averred that the purported assignments
to the 1st plaintiff by the 2nd defendant were procured by fraud. Accordingly,
the respondent counterclaimed for a declaration of ownership of the land in
dispute, fraud on the part of 1st plaintiff, and an order setting aside the
transfer from the 1st plaintiff to the appellants. Additionally, the respondent
sought an order for recovery of possession of the land from the appellants and a
perpetual injunction. <o:p></o:p>The 2nd defendant was joined to the action by the respondent.
It denied assigning any land at Prampram to the 1st plaintiff. According to the
2nd defendant, per a contract of sale dated 22nd March 2007, it sold
its entire interest in the land at Prampram to the respondent and had put the respondent
in possession of same. Thus, the 2nd defendant claimed that the 1st plaintiff’s
purported deeds of assignment were procured by fraud and were forgeries. We
would return in due course to examine the procedural propriety of joining the 2nd
defendant to the suit and adding the 1st plaintiff as a party. <o:p></o:p>GROUNDS OF APPEAL<o:p></o:p>The appellants filed two grounds of appeal. They
are as follows:<o:p></o:p><!--[if !supportL</main>