EDWARD OFFEI-BEKOE VRS ALHAJI ASUMAN DEBA & ANOR. [2024] GHAHC 133 (26 February 2024)

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF JUDICATURE, IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE GHANA (LAND COURT 7) HELD IN ACCRA ON THE MONDAY THE 26TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2024 BEFORE HIS LORDSHIP ALEXANDER OSEI TUTU (J.) SUIT NO. L/0239/2023 EDWARD OFFEI-BEKOE :: 2 TESA STREET EAST LEGON – ACCRA PLAINTIFF/RESPONDENT VRS ALHAJI ASUMA DEBA :: 1ST DEFENDANT/APPLICANT ::

ALHAJI TAOFEEK SULLEY ALL OF UNNUMBERED HOUSE – ACCRA =========================================================== PARTIES:

PARTIES ABSENT 2ND DEFENDANT/APPLICANT COUNSEL: ALFRED PAAPA DANKWAH ESQ., FOR PLAINITFF/RESPONDENT

PRESENT MAHOMMED SAHOON ESQ., FOR 1ST DEFENDANT/APPLICANT

PRESENT ===========================================================

R U L I N G I have been tasked by the parties to give a Ruling pursuant to the filing of the Written Submissions by both Counsel. I must confess that I find the duty RULING DELIVERED BY J. ALEXANDER OSEI TUTU IN SUIT NO. LD/0239/2022 AT LAND COURT ‘7’ ON 26 TH FEBRUARY, 2024 Page | 1 entrusted to me a difficult one, basically because of my limited information of the antecedents of the case, but I will do my best in the circumstances with the little knowledge I have gathered from the submissions and record. Reading the submissions filed, it seems to me that the 1st Defendant moved the Court to dismiss the instant action for being frivolous and an abuse of the Court process. While the 1st Defendant/Applicant claims that he had a Judgment in a previous suit which land is not different from the subject matter land, the Plaintiff asserts that the land in the said judgment is separate and distinct from his land. This made the Court, differently constituted, to order for a superimposition and the drawing up of a Composite Plan, which was done. Although the Surveyor appeared in Court to be cross – examined, his Report seemed not to adequately resolve the entire issues in the matter. At the last page of the Written Submissions by Counsel for the 1st Defendant, he noted “The Lands Commission cannot derogate from its grant and are estopped from denying so. Litigation must come to an end

and we urge the Court to use its powers under the Lands Act, 2020 (Act 1036) Section 45 – to set aside or modify any agreement to convey land on grounds of illegality among other grounds”. If I should dismiss this suit as urged on me by the Applicant at this stage, how would the Court be able to set aside or modify an agreement pertaining to the conveyance in the suit when the Lands Commission is not a party? See AGBOSU VRS KOTEY AND ORS [2003–2005] 1 GLR 685 at holding 10. I also observed that the Defendants relied on some correspondences with the Lands Commission prior to the institution of this suit and there are matters not clearly within the scope of the Report of the Composite Plan drawn up. I do not think the Composite Plan, at this stage is able to resolve all the issues entailed in this suit and the need to probe further by taking evidence becomes imperative. In interpreting the Rules of this Court, the Court are guided by the objective of the Court Rules in Order 1 Rule 1 (2) of C. I. 47 which enjoins it among others, to ensure that all disputes and issues are effectively and finally determined. RULING DELIVERED BY J. ALEXANDER OSEI TUTU IN SUIT NO. LD/0239/2022 AT LAND COURT ‘7’ ON 26 TH FEBRUARY, 2024 Page | 2 Accordingly, this Court will decline the Application made to have the suit dismissed. Lands Commission is to be joined to the suit suo moto in the interest of justice in line with Order 4 Rule 5 (2) (b) of C. I.

47. The Plaintiffs/Respondents are to amend the Writ of Summons to include the Lands Commission as 3rd Defendant. (SGD.) H/L ALEXANDER OSEI TUTU

JUSTICE OF THE HIGH COURT REFERENCES: CASE CITED: AGBOSU VRS KOTEY AND ORS [2003–2005] 1 GLR 685 ENACTMENT: THE HIGH COURT, CIVIL PROCEDURE 2004 - ORDER 4 RULE 5 (2) (B) OF C. I. 47 RULING DELIVERED BY J. ALEXANDER OSEI TUTU IN SUIT NO. LD/0239/2022 AT LAND COURT ‘7’ ON 26 TH FEBRUARY, 2024 Page | 3