Aduah and Another Vrs Koomson and Others [2023] GHAHC 142 (7 March 2023)

Aduah and Another Vrs Koomson and Others [2023] GHAHC 142 (7 March 2023)

Plaintiffs failed to prove title to the disputed land on balance of probabilities; evidence of doctored documents undermined credibility; fraud and mistake not established against defendants; Limitation Act does not avail plaintiffs due to lack of adverse possession.

Citation
Aduah and Another Vrs Koomson and Others [2023] GHAHC 142 (7 March 2023)
Parties
Plaintiff: Nana Kofi Aduah; Plaintiff: Mrs Comfort Assan Aduah; Defendant: Hon. Mavis Hawa Koomson; Defendant: Ben Acquah; Defendant: Elizabeth Acquah; Defendant: Ransford Acquah; Defendant: Lands Commission, Cape Coast
Court
ghahc
Jurisdiction
Ghana
Judgment Date
7 March 2023
Procedural Posture
Civil / Final Judgment
Outcome
Plaintiffs' action dismissed.
Legal Topics
Declaration of Title, Recovery of Possession, Trespass, Fraud, Mistake, Limitation Act, Estoppel
Source Language
eng
Property Law Civil Procedure Declaration of Title Recovery of Possession Trespass Fraud Mistake Limitation Act +1 more

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 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Nana Kofi Aduah

Plaintiff

Mrs Comfort Assan Aduah

Plaintiff

Hon. Mavis Hawa Koomson

Defendant

Ben Acquah

Defendant

Elizabeth Acquah

Defendant

Ransford Acquah

Defendant

Lands Commission, Cape Coast

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether plaintiffs have title to the disputed land
  2. 2 Whether registration of 2nd and 3rd defendants' interest was by fraud or mistake
  3. 3 Whether Limitation Act avails plaintiffs

Ratio Decidendi

Plaintiffs failed to prove title to the disputed land on balance of probabilities; evidence of doctored documents undermined credibility; fraud and mistake not established against defendants; Limitation Act does not avail plaintiffs due to lack of adverse possession.

Court Disposition

Plaintiffs' action dismissed.