Alhasan v Abubakar and Another (LD/0705/2019) [2025] GHAHC 85 (20 March 2025)

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF JUDICATURE, IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE, INDUSTRIAL AND LABOUR DIVISION 2 HELD IN ACCRA ON THURSDAY THE 20TH DAY OF MARCH 2025 BEFORE HER LADYSHIP JUSTICE ANANDA J. AIKINS (MRS) JUSTICE OF THE HIGH COURT. SUIT NO. LD/0705/2019 OSUMANU ALHASAN H/NO.M226/3 PLAINTIFF MADINA, ACCRA VRS 1. FATIMA ABUBAKAR DEFENDANTS 2. DR. SEIDU ABUBAKAR HOUSE NO. MON/14 COUNSEL FOR THE PLAINTIFF: SAM SETH WOOD ESQ. COUNSEL FOR THE DEFENDANTS: JUDGMENT Page | 1 Per his amended writ and statement of claim filed on 3rd of March 2023, the plaintiff sought the following reliefs against the defendant:- 1) Recovery of possession 2) Declaration of title 3) Injunction restraining the defendants by themselves, their workmen, assigns privies whatsoever from interfering with the land. 4) Cost. The plaintiff described the land claimed in the schedule on his writ as follows:- “all that piece of land situate and being at Madina, Accra and bounded on the North by proposed road measuring 80 feet more or less, on the south by proposed land measuring 80 feet more or less on the east by proposed road measuring 120 feet more or less on the West by Stool land measuring 120 feet more or less and covering an approximate area of 0.22 acre which piece of land is more particularly delineated on the plan attached hereto and thereon shewn edged pink which show the relevant measurements” Though the defendants were served with the amended writ and statement of claim they never responded to same nor did they appear in court for the hearing despite the service of hearing notices on them. Per the pleadings in his statement of claim and also the evidence in his witness statement and the exhibits attached, the plaintiff claimed to be the owner of the parcel of land described in the schedule to his writ and statement of claim. He claimed that there was litigation over part of the land in a previous suit which number he gave as LA/0062/2017. He also stated that he had been paying ground rent to the Administrator of Stool Lands in respect of the land. Page | 2 A perusal of the exhibits attached to the plaintiff’s witness statement filed on the 18th March, 2024 shows that exhibit ‘A’ is an assignment which was executed by the plaintiff and one Gertrude Adjekum in respect of the land the subject matter of this suit and per the said agreement, the plaintiff became the assignee of the said land. Exhibit ‘B’ is also a confirmation by the La Traditional Council that the land had been transferred to the plaintiff and that the plaintiff had been paying ground rent in respect of the land since 1979 to date. As already noted above, the defendants never responded to the plaintiff’s writ and neither did they appear in court to challenge the plaintiff’s evidence. The court is thus of the opinion that plaintiff is entitled to the reliefs sought and the court therefore gives judgment in favour of the plaintiff as follows:- 1) The plaintiff has title to the land claimed 2) The plaintiff is entitled to recover possession of same from the defendants. 3) The defendants are perpetually restrained by themselves, their workmen assigns privies etc from interfering with the land of the plaintiff. 4) The court also awards cost of six thousand (GH¢6,000.00) against the defendants in favour of the plaintiff. (SGD.) JUSTICE ANANDA J. AIKINS (MRS.) JUSTICE OF THE HIGH COURT Page | 3 *c.a.a* Page | 4