SAM QUARSHIE vs. EDDIE KUSI ANKOMAH [2023]DLSC16143

Date	2023-05-10
Suit No.	CIVIL APPEAL NO. J4/59/2022
Citation No.	[2023]DLSC16143

YEBOAH CJ (PRESIDING)

PWAMANG JSC

PROF. KOTEY JSC

TORKORNOO (MRS.) JSC

PROF. MENSA-BONSU (MRS.) JSC

SEAN POKU ESQ. FOR THE PLAINTIFF/RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT.

HUBERT SEVOR ESQ. FOR THE DEFENDANT/APPELLANT/APPELLANT.

[2023]DLSC16143
																																						<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" >SAM QUARSHIE <o:p></o:p>(PLAINTIFF/RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT)<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p><a name="_heading=h.gjdgxs"></a>EDDIE KUSI ANKOMAH&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <o:p></o:p>(DEFENDANT/APPELLANT/APPELLANT) <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;">

CIVIL APPEAL NO.
J4/59/2022&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;DATE:
10TH MAY 2023<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL <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;">

SEAN POKU ESQ. FOR THE
PLAINTIFF/RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT.<o:p></o:p>

HUBERT SEVOR ESQ. FOR THE
DEFENDANT/APPELLANT/APPELLANT.<o:p></o:p>

</div>CORAM<o:p></o:p>YEBOAH
CJ (PRESIDING), PWAMANG JSC, PROF. KOTEY JSC, TORKORNOO (MRS.) JSC, PROF.
MENSA-BONSU (MRS.) JSC&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <o:p></o:p><div style="border-top-width: 1.5pt; border-top-color: black; border-left: none; border-bottom-width: 1.5pt; border-bottom-color: black; border-right: none; padding: 1pt 0cm;">

<p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="margin-bottom:0cm;text-align:center;
line-height:normal;border:none;mso-border-top-alt:solid black 1.5pt;mso-border-bottom-alt:
solid black 1.5pt;padding:0cm;mso-padding-alt:1.0pt 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">JUDGMENT <o:p></o:p>

</div>&nbsp;PWAMANG JSC:-<o:p></o:p>My Lords, this appeal
emanates from a land suit the plaintiff/respondent/respondent (the plaintiff)
filed in the High Court, Accra and claimed for declaration of title, damages
and injunction in respect of a piece of land at Shiashie, Accra that the
defendant/appellant/appellant (the defendant) was in the process of developing.<o:p></o:p>By his statement of claim,
the plaintiff averred that he acquired the land by a lease dated 1st September,
1999 from the Appantse We Family of Shiashe, got it registered at the Land
Title Registry and he was issued with a Land Certificate dated 23rd March,
2002. On acquisition he placed some persons on the land and they sold pavement
and other blocks on it. He averred that he was in peaceful possession until
sometime in June, 2017 when the defendant forcibly entered the land and started
to develop it. He reported a case against the defendant to the police but they
could not resolve his complaint hence the suit in court.<o:p></o:p>The defendant filed a
statement of defence and stated that the piece of land he was developing did
not form part of the land that was granted to the plaintiff and that it was the
same Appantse We Family of Shiashie who granted the land he defendant was
developing to him by a lease dated 1st August, 2014. He pleaded that before
acquiring his land he conducted searches which showed the land to be vacant.
According to him, when he entered the land and the plaintiff challenged him and
reported a case to the police, the police after listening to him caused the
government surveyors to conduct two surveys of the disputed land using the
documents given to the plaintiff and himself and the result of the two surveys
showed that his land only shares a boundary with the plaintiff’s land but that
the two grants cover different lands. The defendant stated that as the survey
reports established that his building operations were on his land and did not extend
to the plaintiff’s land, the police permitted him to continue with his works.<o:p></o:p>According to the record
before us, no reply to the statement of defence was filed by the plaintiff but
at the trial the plaintiff under cross-examination admitted that before the
case was filed the police caused the survey of the land and that two survey
reports were produced. He however countered by saying that those surveys were
not valid. The defendant tendered the two composite plans that were produced by
the government surveyors on the request of the police. We notice that the two
composite plans depict the lands differently and that no explanatory legends
are attached to them as is the usual practice in these matters. The defendant
called a representative of their common grantor as DW1&nbsp; and his evidence was that the land they
granted to the defendant does not form part of what they gave to the plaintiff.<o:p></o:p>From the above, a crucial
fact in issue that has to be determined before a just decision can be given in
this case is; whether the land in dispute falls within the plaintiff’s site
plan contained in his lease or it lies outside it? This issue was not
distinctly set down for determination in this manner at the application for
directions, but it constitutes the crux of the dispute since the parties have a
common grantor and the lands of the parties are said to share a common
boundary. Unfortunately, both the lower court and the trial court failed to
identify this issue and to add</main>