Lomotey Vrs Teye [2022] GHAHC 116 (24 November 2022)

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF JUDICATURE, IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE (LAND DIVISION) ACCRA HELD ON THURSDAY THE 24TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2022 BEFORE HER LADYSHIP JUSTICE JENNIFER MYERS AHMED (MRS), JUSTICE OF THE HIGH COURT. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ELIZABETH PETERSON LOMOTEY : PLAINTIFF SUIT NO: LD/0101/2022 VRS EVANS QUASHIE TEYE. : DEFENDANTS --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- PLAINTIFF: DEFENDANT: Absent Absent COUNSEL FOR PLAINTIFF: Mr. Richard Dante h/b of Mr. Peter Zwennes -Present COUNSEL FOR 4th to 12th DEFENDANTS: Absent. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- RULING The prayer of the defendant-applicants brought under order II rule 18 (1) d of C. I 47 is for this court to dismiss the instant suit as being an abuse of court process. The applicants have put up a rigorous submission, arguing that the plaintiff is seeking to relitigate issues that have already been decided in suit number LD/1184/2016. The plaintiff-respondent counters that this is not a true picture of affairs, considering the reliefs being sought by her in this suit. What are these reliefs? The first 2 reliefs sought by the plaintiff herein in this suit are for: (1) A declaration that the land title certificate number GA 58023 issued by the 16th defendant on the 14th of March 2019 in favor of the 1st to 15th defendants in respect of a portion of plaintiff’s registered land at Amrahia, Accra, comprising 36.80 acres was fraudulently processed and same is null and void. An order to set aside as fraudulent, null and void, the said land title certificate number GA 58023 issued by the 16th defendant on the 14th day of March 2019 in favor of the 1st to 15th defendants. The thrust of the plaintiffs case is that in March 2019 the land court issued the applicant herein with a land title certificate covering a parcel of land measuring 36.80 acres when the ruling of Oppong, J (as he then was) in suit number LD/1184/2016 only related to 31.20 acres of land. Now there are some facts that have been established via the affidavit evidence submitted by the parties for and in opposition to the motion. Firstly, in suit number LD/1184/2016 the applicants herein sued one William Kormatsi, a grantor of the plaintiff. The Judge Anthony Oppong, J (as he then was) came to the conclusion that the land of the plaintiff herein measuring 219.89 acres was exclusive of the land acquired by the applicants herein measuring 31.20 acres. Secondly, the plaintiff herein subsequent to the ruling of Oppong, J (as he then was), instituted another suit in suit number LD/1109/2017 against the applicant herein seeking to set aside the ruling of the court in suit number LD/1184/2016, even though court had made a determination that her land was exclusive of the applicants herein. That suit was very clearly an abuse of court process. Thirdly, the plaintiff by her own showing has since September 2014 been engaged in another suit filed by the chief of Amrahia, her grantor family in suit number FAL/04/14 and it does not appear that any judgement has been rendered in that suit. Fourthly, the chief of Amrahia has also instituted a suit against the 1st to 15th defendants herein in suit number LD/0141/2018 laying claim to their 31.20 acres of land. Fifthly, it is a fact that the 31.20 acres acquired by the applicants has been conclusively determined to be exclusive of plaintiff’s 219.89 acres. Essentially then, the only question would be whether the land title certificate of the applicants which according to the plaintiff covers 36.80 acres, includes any part of the plaintiffs 219.89 acres. To arrive at a determination, it is obvious that a composite site plan would need to be drawn up by surveyors from the Survey and Mapping Division of the Lands Commission since that would be the only way to establish whether the plaintiff has a cause of action over the 5.6 acres of land which exceeds the 31.80 acres acquired by the applicants herein. If the composite site plan indicates that any part of the 219.89 acres of the plaintiffs land is covered by the land title certificate of the defendants herein then she has a cause of action. If not, then her suit will be rendered nugatory. BY COURT: Parties are to file survey instructions within 14 days. Hearing notice to issue to the defendants. Cost of GH¢1,000.00. The hearing notice should be served alongside the courts notes for the day. Suit Adjourned to 12/12/2022. (SGD.) JENNIFER ANNE MYERS AHMED J, (MRS.) JUSTICE OF THE HIGH COURT 4