|
JUDGMENT
BY COURT:
On 25th February,
2010, the Plaintiff herein
issued out a writ against the
Defendant and claimed the
following reliefs:
a)
A declaration of title to all
that piece or parcel of land and
in extent 0.11 hectare (0.27 of
an acre) more or less being
parcel No. 63.Block 4, Section
021 situate at Asylum Down in
the Greater Accra Region of the
Republic of Ghana, as delineated
on Registry Map of Ghana No
003/02/1988 in the Land Title
Registry, Victoriaborg Accra.
b)
An Order of ejectement against
the Defendant from the three
bedroom house located on the
said land.
c)
Cost.
On 16th April, 2010
Interlocutory Judgement was
entered against the Defendant,
on an application on notice to
the Defendant even though the
Defendant had then not entered
appearance to the writ and the
statement of claim which were
served on the Defendant
personally on 15th
February, 2010. The motion on
notice was also served on the
Defendant personally on 31st
March 2010.
On 28th May 2010, the
Plaintiffs attorney gave
evidence in proof of her title.
She traced her root of title
from her father’s will exhibit
‘B’ dated 29th
January 1959, which will was
granted probate on 20th
April 1959. She testified again
that by paragraph 4 of exhibit
‘B’ certain properties,
including the house in dispute
were devised to the Plaintiff,
who was then called Okailey O.
Okai and her late brother called
Nii Teiko, whose son is the
Defendant. The Plaintiff
however pleaded and also gave
evidence that her late brother
being the Defendants father sold
his share of the devise made to
them.
As the plaintiff was living in
England and there was nobody in
the house, the Defendant was put
in occupation of the Plaintiffs
portion. The Defendant however
does not pay any rent. To
consolidate her title to the
land, the Plaintiff registered
her title under the Land Title
Registration Law (P. N.D.C law
152), and was issued with
exhibit “C”.
Even though the Plaintiff did
not call any witness, I accept
the evidence of the Plaintiff as
the truth since both the
Plaintiffs pleading and the
evidence have not being
controverted in any way. In the
case of Takoradi Flour Mills
vrs. Samir faris (2005-06) SC
GLR 882, It was held in the
third holding that “A tribunal
of fact can decide on issue on
the evidence of only one party.
A bare assertion on oath by a
single witness might in the
proper circumstances of a case
be enough to form the basis of a
Judicial Adjudication. The
essential thing is that the
witness is credible by the
standards set in Section 80 (2)
of the evidence Decree, 1975 ….”
I therefore enter Judgement for
the plaintiff as
follows:
a)
The Plaintiff is declared title
to the land described in relief
‘a’
b)
The Plaintiff is to recover
immediate possession of the
three bedroom house occupied by
the Defendant on the land in
dispute.
c)
Cost of GH¢2,000.00 is awarded
against the Defendant.
Counsel:
Mr. G. h. Quist for Plaintiff
Respondent
MR.
JUSTICE S.H. OCRAN
Justice of the High Court
|
