Setordzi And 2 Others Vrs. Humali And 10 Others (C13/01/2024) [2023] GHAHC 655 (31 October 2023)

1 IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF JUDICATURE IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE, DENU HELD THIS TUESDAY 31 OCTOBER 2023 BEFORE HIS LORDSHIP JUSTICE GEORGE BUADI, J SUIT NO. C13/01/2024 KWAME SETORDZIE & 2 ORS Vrs OSOFO GODSON NANI HUMALI & 10 ORS RULING ON APPLICATION FOR INTERLOCUTORY INJUNCTION I have perused the case docket, and all the papers filed in this application. I have also listened to the submissions of the learned lawyers both on the facts; historical facts and the law on the matter. I find as a fact that the Respondents, per their affidavit - paragraphs 8, 9, and 10 - have been in effective possession of the subject matter shrine all these years. The law is that, though possession, no matter how long it takes is no proof of legal ownership, it remains true, all the same. that a person in possession is presumed to be the owner until the real ownership is proven. The ownership of the subject matter shrine is presently a subject matter of substantive suit before this court where the applicants as plaintiffs are seeking varied declarations as to the ownership and custody of the shrine. Having considered all the papers, indeed, Page 1 of 2 paragraphs 8, 9, and 10, of the affidavit in opposition, I find documentary evidence of the possession of the shrine in the established hands of Respondents. Until the substantive suit is finally determined to establish the real or actual ownership of the shrine, the status quo shall remain. I deem it unfair to rely on affidavit evidence to restrain whoever had long been in possession of the shrine and had been operating and managing it. My view is that the application has no merits, indeed without the support as opposed to the evidence produced by the Respondents. Application dismissed. Costs of GH¢3,000 for Respondents against the Applicants. Ordered accordingly. (SGD) George Buadi High Court, Denu Page 2 of 2