Naa Kuokor Nikoi and Daniel Ashie Kotey v Alex Lovejoy Armah (substituted by Samuel Ayittey Hammond) and Joseph Sedoh (substituted by Alhaji Karimu)
by Justice Emmanuel Amo Yartey
Jurisdiction
High Court of Ghana
Judge
Justice Emmanuel Amo Yartey
Catalog Type
Case
Judgement Date
Jan 30, 2026
Summary
The plaintiffs commenced an action against the defendants seeking a declaration of title, recovery of possession, damages for trespass and a perpetual injunction in respect of land situated at Nikoi Olai Town, Accra. The plaintiffs claimed ownership of the land through a lease granted to the 1st plaintiff by the Nikoi Olai Stool family in 2002 and relied on acts of possession including fencing and depositing building materials, as well as steps taken to register the land. The defendants resisted the claim, contending that the land belonged to the Asere Stool and that the 2nd defendant had lawfully acquired the land from the 1st defendant. The 2nd defendant further relied on a search conducted at the Lands Commission and evidence of long possession and development of the land, including the construction of a dwelling house. The central issue before the court was whether the plaintiffs had established a valid title to the land and were entitled to the reliefs sought. In determining this issue, the court considered the burden and standard of proof in civil cases, emphasizing that a plaintiff must prove his claim on a balance of probabilities and succeed on the strength of his own case. The court found that the Lands Commission search report revealed that the land in dispute had been acquired by the State under an Executive Instrument. There was no evidence that the State had divested itself of its interest in the land or that either party had obtained a valid grant from the State. Consequently, the court held that neither party’s grantor had the capacity to convey title to the land. In the circumstances, the plaintiffs failed to establish a valid root of title and therefore failed to discharge the burden of proof required to sustain their claims. The plaintiffs’ action was accordingly dismissed, with no order as to costs.
Full Content
1.0 INTRODUCTION:
The case of the Plaintiff as captured by their statement of claim is that the 1st Plaintiff is a Librarian with the Bank of Ghana and lives at Larebiokorshie in Accra. The 2nd Plaintiff is the grantor of 1st Plaintiff and head of the Nikoi Olai Family of Asere.
1.1 The 1st Defendant claims he is the lawful representative of the Asere Stool of Akotia Oworsika. The 2nd Defendant is a person unknown to the Plaintiffs and has trespassed unto the 1st Plaintiff’s land.
1.2 The 1st Plaintiff says she is the owner of ALL THAT PIECE OR PARCEL OF LAND situate lying and being at NIKOI OLAI TOWN, Accra, bounded on the North by a proposed road, measuring 100 feet more or less; on the East by lessor’s land, measuring 140 feet more or less; on the South by a proposed road, measuring 100 feet more or less and on the West by lessor’s land, measuring 140 feet more or less, containing an approximate area of 0.32 acre more or less.
1.3 The 1st Plaintiff states that she became the owner and beneficiary of the land by virtue of a lease made between the Nikoi Olai Stool Family of Asere Djorshie and herself on 1st day of January, 2002.
1.4 The 1st Plaintiff deposited sand and stones together with cement blocks thereon and built a fence wall around the land. The 1st Plaintiff subsequently commenced registration thereof and the conveyance is numbered LVB. 9293/02, and some time on 8th December, 2007, her title to the land was published in the Ghanaian Times newspaper.
1.5 Sometime in 2009, the case between the parties went before the Police Regional CID Crime Officer Bright Oduro, who warned that nobody should go onto the land until the ownership question is resolved.
1.6 The 1st Plaintiff contends that during this period the 2nd Defendant went onto the land and trespassed on the land by building a foundation and built a platform therefore which the 2nd Defendant has filled up to a point and the 1st Plaintiff took pictures of the said development.
1.7 The 1st Plaintiff has built a wall around one plot and the 2nd Defendant purporting to take the other plot, under the influence of the 1st Defendant, and had fenced it.
1.8 The 1st Plaintiff says that it is without her leave and license, the 2nd defendant trespassed unto the land by commencing what appears to be a gigantic structure thereon. The 1st Plaintiff contends that she warned the 2nd Defendant to desist from the said trespass, however the 2nd Defendant still insist the land belongs to him, as he purchased it from the 1st Defendant.
1.9 The 1st Plaintiff contends that the Defendants have refused or neglected to recognize her title to the land and the 2nd Defendant is committing a continuing trespass on the land. The 1st Plaintiff
contends that by reason of the foregoing matters she has suffered loss and damage and continues to suffer loss damage and deprivation.
2.0 The 1st Plaintiff therefore claims against the Defendants the reliefs endorsed on her writ of summons herein as follows:
a. Declaration of title to all that piece or parcel of land situate lying and being at Nikoi Olai Town, Accra, bounded on the North by proposed road, measuring 100 feet more or less; on the East by lessor’s land, measuring 140 feet more or less; on the South by a proposed road, measuring 100 feet more or less and on the West by lessor’s land, measuring 140 feet more or less, containing an approximate area of 0.32 acre more or less.
b. Recovery of possession.
c. Damages for trespass thereto
d. Further or other reliefs as in the circumstance may be just including in particular perpetual injunction to restrain the Defendants, whether themselves, their servants, agents, workmen, assigns whomsoever or otherwise howsoever from interfering with the
Plaintiffs’ ownership occupation and possession of the land.
2.1 In resisting the claim of the Plaintiffs, the Defendants caused their lawyers to enter an appearance and also filed a defence on their behalf. The statement of defence was subsequently amended. At the Application for Directions stage, the following issues were set down for determination:
a. Whether or not the Nikoi Olai Stool of Djorshie we or the Akotia Oworsika Stool is the Asere Stool.
b. Whether or not the land in dispute belongs to the Nikoi Olai Stool of Djorshie We or the Akotia.
c. Whether or not all lands in Asere belong to the Nikoi Olai Stool or Akotia Awosika Stool.
d. Whether or not the 1st Plaintiff is entitled to her claim.
2.2 If I may ask, are the Plaintiffs entitled to their reliefs they are seeking against the Defendants?
2.3 The law is trite that a plaintiff in a civil case has the legal and evidential burden to produce admissible evidence to prove his/her claims and assertions. Section 11(1) of the Evidence Act, 1975, NRCD 323 defines the burden of producing evidence as follows:
“For the purpose of this Act, the burden of producing evidence means the obligation of a party to introduce sufficient evidence to avoid a ruling on the issue against that party.”
2.4 The Supreme Court of Ghana in ACKAH V. PERGAH TRANSPORT LIMITED [2010] SCGLR 729 stated the law
succinctly as follow:
“It is a basic principle of law on evidence that a party who bears the burden of proof is to produce the required evidence of the facts in issue that has the quality of credibility short of which his claim may fail.”
2.5 To entitle a plaintiff to a ruling from the court on his claims, the law imposes on the plaintiff to produce the admissible evidence to the required standard of proof namely; on the balance of probabilities in a civil action such as the instant case. The Supreme court in the case of ADWUBENG V. DOMFEH [1996-97] SCGLR 660 stated the standard of proof required in all civil actions at holding 3 of the head notes as follows:
“Section 11(4) and 12 of the Evidence Decree, 1975 (NRCD 323) (which came into force on 1st October, 1979) have clearly provided that the standard of proof in all civil actions was proof by preponderance of probabilities – no exceptions were made.”
2.6 It is with the above statement of law that this case and evidence of the respective parties and their witnesses will be analyzed in respect of each arising issue for determination.
2.7 In discharging the burden placed on her by law the 1st Plaintiff testified that in the year 2001, she decided to acquire a land in Accra for a dwelling place for which reason she had a discussion with her late mother, Mrs. Sarah A. Nikoi who led her to Weku Nukpa Richard Kotei Addision who was the head and lawful representative of the NiKoi Olai Stool family (Asere Djorshie).
2.8 She was taken to the land by their surveyor and two plots were allocated to her. It is her evidence that after the preparation of the site plan and after conducting due diligence, she paid for the lands and was issued with an indenture covering the land. See Exhibit “A”, a copy of the Indenture.
2.9 She thereafter took possession of the land and deposited sand, stone and concrete blocks on the land. And that it was when she
was about fencing the two plots of land, that she realized the 1st Defendant had sold one of the two plots to one Constable Joseph Seddoh of the James Town Police Station who started fencing same.
3.0 According to the 1st Plaintiff, she reported the matter to the Accra Central Police Station and they were paraded before the Crime Officer, Bright Oduro and who advised them not to develop the land pending police investigations but the Defendants refused and continued developing the land.
3.1 It is also her testimony that she later made a formal complaint to the police against Constable Joseph Seddoh to his superiors and he abandoned the land. However, the 1st Defendant resold the land to the present 2nd Defendant who is now developing parts of the land. See Exhibit “B” series, Pictures of the said development. She however managed to fence the first plot but could not fence the second plot because the 2nd Defendant had trespassed onto same.
3.2 And that the present 2nd Defendant purchased the land despite the numerous warnings that the land was a subject matter of a court action. Also the 2nd Defendant disregarded all warnings and started putting up structures on the land without regards to the law.
3.3 According to the 1st Plaintiff on the receipt of the indenture she deposited it at the Lands Commission for registration and her document was numbered LVB 9293/02. And that during the registration process, her name was published in the Ghanaian times, December 8, 2007 edition. See Exhibit D, a copy of the Yellow Card. She called a representative of her grantor as a witness.
3.4 In his testimony, the 2nd Defendant stated that the 1st Defendant has informed him that he is the Nkosuohene of the Asere Stool and the Adontenhene as well as the legal representative of the Stool. And that the land in dispute was given to him and the wife in 2010 by the Asere Stool hereto. See Exhibit “2”, a copy of the Indenture.
3.5 He further stated that he conducted a search at the Lands Commission which indicated that it was acquired first for a Race Course. See Exhibit “3”, a copy of the Search Report.
3.6 Thereafter, he presented the indenture to the Lands Commission and he was issued with a Yellow Card indicating the fact that he had deposited his documents for registration. See Exhibit “4”, a copy of the yellow Card.
3.7 He thereafter took possession of the land and started construction of a dwelling house thereon without any interference from any person including the Plaintiffs. And that he has completed the building since 2012 and has been living there ever since. See Exhibit “5” series, Photographs of the building on the land.
3.8 He told the court that there exists plethora of judgments covering the land in dispute which declared that the land is the property of Asere Stool Family and therefore Nikoi Olai Family, from who the 1st Plaintiff claims her interest does not have any interest in the land to have transferred to the 1st Plaintiff. See Exhibit “6” series, copies of the Judgments.
3.9 The 1st Defendant, a representative of the 2nd Defendant’s grantor testified in support of the 2nd Defendant’s case.
If I may ask, are the grantors of the parties clothed with the requisite capacities to deal with the subject-matter land in dispute?
4.0 There is evidence before me depicting that before the 2nd Defendant acquired the subject land from his grantor, he conducted a search to check whether or not the land was encumbered.
4.1 Paragraph 4 of the 2nd Defendant’s witness statement reads:
“4. That I conducted a search at the Lands Commission which indicated that it was acquired first for a race course and same is attached hereto and marked as Exhibit 3.”
4.2 A perusal of the search report depicts same was conducted on 23rd March, 2022. Paragraph 1 of the Search Report reads:
“State land acquired under Executive Instrument dated 23/04/1975.”
A copy of the said Executive Instrument was admitted in evidence as Exhibit “6”.
4.3 In the circumstance I hold that the subject matter land is a State land. There is no evidence before the court that the state has granted the land to any of the parties to enable any of them to acquire any interest in the subject land for which reason I accordingly dismiss the Plaintiffs’ claim against the Defendants.
No order as to cost.