KORTO VRS. MYTIME REALITY ESTATES CO. LTD VRS. OTHERS (LD/0321/2023) [2024] GHAHC 132 (31 January 2024)

KORTO VRS. MYTIME REALITY ESTATES CO. LTD VRS. OTHERS (LD/0321/2023) [2024] GHAHC 132 (31 January 2024)

The Plaintiff failed to use the prescribed procedure to challenge the writ of possession and auction sale, instead filing a writ and statement of claim. This is not only irregular but goes to the jurisdiction of the court. The action is plainly unsustainable, amounts to an abuse of process, and must be dismissed under Order 11 Rule 18(1)(b) and (d) of C.I. 47.

Citation
KORTO VRS. MYTIME REALITY ESTATES CO. LTD VRS. OTHERS (LD/0321/2023) [2024] GHAHC 132 (31 January 2024)
Parties
Plaintiff: Felix Korto; 1st Defendant: Mytime Reality Estates Co. Ltd; 2nd Defendant: Menda Development and Construction; 3rd Defendant: The Sheriff; 4th Defendant: Nana Osei Bonsu Banin; 5th Defendant: Yaw Sarfo Atakora
Court
ghahc
Jurisdiction
Ghana
Judgment Date
31 January 2024
Procedural Posture
Civil Land/property / Ruling on Preliminary Objection/strike Out Application
Outcome
Action dismissed as frivolous, vexatious, and/or an abuse of process.
Legal Topics
Abuse of Process, Auction Sale, Writ of Possession, Jurisdiction, Interlocutory Injunction, Setting Aside Sale
Source Language
eng
Civil Procedure Property Law Abuse of Process Auction Sale Writ of Possession Jurisdiction Interlocutory Injunction Setting Aside Sale

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 21 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Felix Korto

Plaintiff

Mytime Reality Estates Co. Ltd

1st Defendant

Menda Development and Construction

2nd Defendant

The Sheriff

3rd Defendant

Nana Osei Bonsu Banin

4th Defendant

Yaw Sarfo Atakora

5th Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Land/property / Ruling on Preliminary Objection/strike Out Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the suit should be dismissed as an abuse of process under Order 11 Rule 18(1)(b) and (d) of C.I. 47
  2. 2 Whether the Plaintiff adopted the proper procedure to challenge the auction sale and writ of possession

Ratio Decidendi

The Plaintiff failed to use the prescribed procedure to challenge the writ of possession and auction sale, instead filing a writ and statement of claim. This is not only irregular but goes to the jurisdiction of the court. The action is plainly unsustainable, amounts to an abuse of process, and must be dismissed under Order 11 Rule 18(1)(b) and (d) of C.I. 47.

Court Disposition

Action dismissed as frivolous, vexatious, and/or an abuse of process.

Orders

  • Action dismissed under Order 11 Rule 18(1)(b) and (d) of C.I. 47
  • Plaintiff to pay costs of GHC15,000 to 4th and 5th Defendants