ASSEM VRS ABAYATEYE (A11/03/2024) [2022] GHADC 431 (11 July 2022)

IN THE DISTRICT COURT HELD AT SEGE ON THURSDAY THE 11TH DAY OF JULY, 2024. BEFORE HER WORSHIP VICTORIA AKUA GHANSAH ESQ. AS MAGISTRATE. SUIT NO. A11/03/2024 KABUTEY ASSEM PLAINTIFF VRS DORNUKIE SOYOBI ABAYATEYE DEFENDANT JUDGMENT THE Plaintiff herein instituted this action against the defendant on the 26th day of October 2023for the following reliefs; 1. An order to compel the Defendant herein to prepare a deed of conveyance to cover one plot of land situate lying and being at Anyamam which defendant sold to Plaintiff at a cost of GHS 5,500.00 but defendant had persistently refused to prepare the deed of conveyance of the said land. 2. Costs in this suit. The defendant was duly served but he failed to appear in court. The court ordered for Hearing Notices to be issued and same served on the defendant on the following dates 20th November 2023, 18th January 2024, 8th February 2024, 11th of June 2024 and 24th of June when the case was called the defendant failed to appear in court after all the court processes and Hearing Notices were served on him. The court on the 24th of June 2024 ordered the Plain tiff to file his witness statement and that of any witness he intends to invite. Plaintiff accordingly filed his witness statement and the statement of his witness Victoria Kiki Doku (PW1). Both witness statements were admitted as their evidence in chief. PLAINTIFF A summary of the Plaintiff’s case was that he needed land for a project. The witness in the case Victoria Kiki Doku introduced him to the defendant who admitted that their father had plots of land at Anyamam. One of his siblings was sick so the family have agreed to sell one plot of land to take care of him at the hospital. Plaintiff stated further that he spoke with one of the brothers of the defendant on phone of which he consented to the sale of the land. The defendant took plaintiff to visit the land after which he expressed interest in purchasing the land in issue valued at GHS5,500.00. Plaintiff added that after the full payment the defendant has refused to prepare the necessary document to cover the land. All efforts made for the defendant to prepare the document has failed unless compelled by this court. Hence the claims of plaintiff before this court. PW1 is VICTORIA KIKI DOKU a Salt Miner at Anyamam. PW2 testified that the defendant had earlier contacted her that he had a plot of land he wants to sell to send his sick brother to hospital. She therefore informed the Plaintiff who expressed interest. PW1 continued that she send the Plaintiff to the defendant to pay GH5.500.00 to the defendant for the land. Later the plaintiff informed me that the defendant has refused to issue the necessary document to cover the land. The legal issue for determination is whether or not the Plaintiff is entitled to his claim The plaintiff in this matter followed due process and served the defendant. The object of the service on the defendant is to give notice to the defendant so as to provide him with the opportunity of defending his rights as stated in the case of State v Asantehene’s Divisional Court BL; Ex parte Kusada [1963] 2 238 SCGLR failure of the defendant to attend court after due service on him is taken to have deliberately failed to take advantage of the opportunity to be heard. In such a situation the audi alteram partem rule cannot be said to have been breached. In the case of Ankomah v City Investment Co Ltd [2007-2008] 1 SCGLR 1064 summed up one of the issues arising under service of document the court held among others that; ” the defendant after several attempts was finally served but failed to appear in court. The trial court therefore rightly adjourned for judgment. A court is entitled to give default judgment as in the instant case if the party fails to appear after notice of the proceedings has been served on him. For then it would be justified to assume that he does not want to be heard”. From the above it is trite that if the defendant chooses not to defend then the plaintiff wins by default. The evidence of the plaintiff in this case was taken on oath as well as the witness which this court assume the evidence of the plaintiff is true. BY COURT The court therefore enter default judgment in favor of the Plaintiff because the defendant did not defendant did not defend himself. With a costs of GH1,000.00 awarded in favor of the plaintiff against the defendant. (SGD) H/W VICTORIA A. GHANSAH D. Y (MAGISTRATE) 4