Francis Annan v Universal Oil Ghana Limited and Alhaji Alhassan Yayah
by Justice Emmanuel Amo Yartey
Jurisdiction
High Court of Ghana
Judge
Justice Emmanuel Amo Yartey
Catalog Type
Case
Judgement Date
Dec 22, 2025
Summary
The plaintiff brought an action for declaration of title, annulment of a purported sale, recovery of possession, damages for trespass, and injunction in respect of land at Akweteman. He claimed ownership through a deed of gift executed in 1989 and a Land Title Certificate issued in 1994. The plaintiff led evidence that the 2nd defendant unlawfully entered the land and subsequently purported to transfer the land to the 1st defendant, who constructed and operated a filling station on the land. The plaintiff had earlier initiated proceedings against the 2nd defendant, but the matter was not concluded due to administrative issues. The defendants failed to actively defend the action despite entering appearance, and the case proceeded largely uncontested. The court held that the plaintiff had established his title through documentary evidence, including the deed of gift and Land Title Certificate. The court further held that the 2nd defendant had no interest in the land and could not validly transfer same to the 1st defendant, applying the nemo dat principle. The court found that the defendants’ actions constituted fraudulent dealing and trespass. The plaintiff was therefore entitled to the reliefs sought, including declaration of title, annulment of the purported sale, recovery of possession, and damages. However, the court declined to grant the order for demolition of the filling station but awarded damages of GH₵30,000 and costs of GH₵20,000 in favour of the plaintiff.
Full Content
1.0 INTRODUCTION:
The case of the Plaintiff is that he is the lawful owner of a piece or parcel of land situate, laying and being at Akweteman near the Tema-Mallam (N-One) Motorway. The Plaintiff acquired his interest in the land by virtue of a Deed of Gift dated the 2nd day of August, 1989 executed between Reuben Adama Tackie as Donor and the Plaintiff. And that originally the land, subject-matter of the instant
suit was gifted to him and his mother, Madam Comfort Odi-Manteaw (deceased).
1.1 The 1st Defendant is a company limited by liability and registered under the laws of Ghana to engage in the Oil business through the operation of Petrol Filling Station. 1st Defendant currently runs a filing station known as Universal Oil but without any authority or license from the Plaintiff, owner of the land subject-matter of this suit.
1.2 According to the Plaintiff the 2nd Defendant fraudulently divested his interest in the land, subject-matter of this suit to the 1st Defendant. Plaintiff avers that his ownership of the land, subject-matter of this suit is evidenced by a Land Title Certificate with No. GA 10039 issued by the Land Title Registry section of the Lands Commission, Accra on 26th July, 1994.
1.3 Plaintiff says that the land subject-matter of this action can be described as all that piece or parcel of land situate at Akweteman containing an approximate area of 0.12 acre and bounded on the North East by donor’s land and measuring 70 feet more or less on the South East by Motorway Road measuring 105 feet more or less on the South West by donor’s land measuring 40 feet and 20 feet
more or less and on the North-West by donor’s land measuring 50 feet and 55 feet more or less.
1.4 Plaintiff after obtaining the Land Title Certificate applied to the Accra Metropolitan Assembly (AMA) for a permit to construct a single storey building as per an attached site plan for use as stores for purposes of trade.
1.5 The Plaintiff through his diligence realized that the 2nd Defendant has entered the land, subject-matter of this suit without any authority or permission by the Plaintiff. The Plaintiff herein and his mother Comfort Odi-Manteaw, (deceased) issued a writ of summons against the 2nd Defendant before the High Court, Accra, in Suit No. 443/93. The suit has been discontinued by a court process.
1.6 The Plaintiff maintains that trial began and was concluded by the High Court, Accra presided over by G. A. Aryeetey J (as he then was). The said judge upon receipt of his promotion to the Court of Appeal failed to deliver judgment in the earlier suit. The Plaintiff filed series of notice of intention to proceed but the registry repeatedly indicated that the docket could not found.
1.7 The 2nd Defendant in defiance of the court’s authority and whilst the case was pending fraudulently divested his non-existent interest in the land to the 1st Defendant.
1.8 Particulars of fraud:
i. That the 2nd Defendant knew or ought to have known that the land does not belong to him.
ii. That the 2nd Defendant knew or ought to have known that he has no authority to convey the Land to the 1st Defendant.
iii. That 2nd Defendant knew or ought to have known that the land belongs to the Plaintiff.
iv. That 1st Defendant knew or ought to have known that the 2nd Defendant cannot transfer to it what the 2nd Defendant did not have.
1.9 The Plaintiff says that the 1st Defendant recklessly and without any diligent effort to find the true owner purchased the land for purposes of building a filing station. And that the 2nd Defendant connived with the 1st Defendant to over-reach the Plaintiff’s interest in the said land.
2.0 It is the case of the Plaintiff that the 1st Defendant has trespassed on the said land and erected a filling station on same. And that the
1st Defendant will continue to unlawfully occupy the said land and profit from same to the detriment of the Plaintiff unless this court intervenes to do justice and equity for both parties.
2.1 Wherefore the Plaintiff claims against the Defendants jointly and severally as follows:
i. Declaration of title to all that piece or parcel of land subject matter at Akweteman aforesaid containing an approximate area of 0.12 acre and bounded on the North East by donor’s land and measuring 70 feet more or less on the South East by the Motorway Road measuring 105 feet more or less on the South West by donor’s land measuring 40 feet and 20 feet more or less and the North West by donor’s land measuring 50 feet and 55 feet more or less.
ii. Declaration that the purported sale of the land subject-matter of this suit by 2nd Defendant to 1st Defendant was wrongful and fraudulent.
iii. An order for the annulment of the purported sale.
iv. An order for recovery of possession of the said land from the 1st Defendant.
v. An order for the demolition of the Petrol Filing erected on the land by 1st Defendant at its expense.
vi. General damages for wrongful and fraudulent dealing with the said land.
vii. General damages for trespass to the said land.
viii. Perpetual injunction to restrain the Defendants whether by themselves or whomsoever of whatever description from dealing with the property in any manner whatsoever.
ix. Any further or other reliefs, inclusive of costs.
2.2 The Defendant caused their lawyers to enter an appearance and also filed their defence. A perusal of the record of proceedings depict that notwithstanding many opportunities given the Defendants to contest the Plaintiff’s action, they failed to do so for which reason the court proceeded with the trial in their absence.
2.3 Per his witness statement dated 26th June, 2019, the Plaintiff’s Attorney as follows:
“1. My name is Steven Stanley Quaye, the lawful attorney for the Plaintiff and I am testifying on his behalf by virtue of Power of Attorney dated 12th March, 2003 stamped as LVB/3282/2003, at the lands
Commission, Accra. I have annexed to my witness statement and labelled as exhibits “A”, the said power of attorney.
2. I will testify that the Plaintiff is the lawful owner of a piece or parcel of land situate, lying and being at Akweteman near the Tema-Mallam (N-One) Motorway. The Plaintiff acquired his interest in the land by virtue of Deed of Gift dated the 3rd day of August, 1989 executed between Janet Tawiah Adjei as donor and the donees Comfort Odi-Manteaw and Francis Nii Yartey Annan, the Plaintiff. I have annexed to my witness statement and labelled same as exhibit “B”, a copy of the said deed of gift with Registration Number AR/GB/62/94.
3. I will state that originally the land, the subject-matter of the instant suit was gifted to the Plaintiff and his mother, Comfort Odi-Manteaw (deceased).
4. I know the 1st Defendant is a company limited by liability and registered under the laws of Ghana to engage in the Oil business through the operation of Petrol Filling Station. The 1st Defendant currently runs
a filling station known as Universal Oil but without any authority or license from the Plaintiff, owner of the land, the subject-matter of this suit.
5. I know the 2nd Defendant to the one who fraudulently divested his interest in the land, subject-matter of this suit to the 1st Defendant.
6. I will testify that the Plaintiff’s ownership of the land, subject-matter of this suit is evidence by a Land Title Certificate with No. GA 10039 issued by the Land Title Registration Division of the Lands Commission, Accra on 26th July, 1994. I have attached to my witness statement and labelled same as Exhibit “C”, a copy of the land certificate dated 26th July, 1994.
7. I will testify that the land subject-matter of this action can be described as all that piece or parcel of land situate at Akweteman containing an approximate area of 0.12 acre and bounded on the North East by donor’s land and measuring 70 feet more or less on the South East by the Motorway Road measuring 105 feet more or less on the South West by donor’s land measuring 40 feet and 20 feet more or less and on the North-
West by donor’s land measuring 50 feet and 55 feet more or less.
8. I will testify that the Plaintiff after obtaining the Land title Certificate applied to the Accra Metropolitan Assembly (AMA) for permit to construct a two storey building as per attached site plan for use as stores for purposes of trade. I have attached to my witness statement and labelled same as Exhibit “D” series copies of the building permit application from, the drawings and the letter dated 11th may, 2000 from the Accra Metropolitan Assembly.
9. I will testify that the Plaintiff through his diligence realized that the 2nd Defendant has entered the land subject-matter of this suit without any authority or permission by the Plaintiff. Plaintiff herein and his mother Comfort Odi-Manteaw (deceased) issued a writ of summons against the 2nd Defendant before the High Court, Accra, in Suit No. 443/93. I have attached to my witness statement and labelled same as Exhibit “E” series copies of the said writ of summons and statement of claim, amended statement of defence and amended reply in the said suit against the 2nd Defendant.
10. I will testify that the Plaintiff will maintain that the trial began and was concluded by the High Court, Accra presided over by G. A. Aryeetey J (as he then was). The said judge upon receipt of his promotion to the Court of Appeal failed to deliver judgment in the earlier suit. Plaintiff filed series of notice of intention to proceed but the registry repeatedly indicated that the docket cannot be found.
11. I will testify that the 2nd Defendant in defence of the court’s authority and whilst the case was pending fraudulent divested his non-existent interest in the land to the 2nd Defendant.
12. Particulars of fraud.
i. That the 2nd Defendant knew or ought to have known that the land does not belong to him.
ii. That the 2nd Defendant knew or ought to have known that he has no authority to convey the land to the 1st Defendant.
iii. That the 2nd Defendant knew or ought to have known that the land belongs to the Plaintiff.
iv. That the 1st Defendant knew or ought to have known that the 2nd Defendant cannot transfer to it what the 2nd Defendant do not have.
13. I will testify that the 1st Defendant recklessly and without any diligent effort to find the true owner purchased the land for purposes of building a filing station. The 2nd Defendant connived with the 1st Defendant to over-reach the Plaintiff’s interest in the said land.
14. I will testify that the 1st Defendant has trespassed on the said land and erected a filling station on same. The 1st Defendant will continue to unlawfully occupy the said land and profit to the detriment of the Plaintiff unless this court intervenes to do justice and equity for both parties.
15. I will testify that the Plaintiff’s land certificate is in respect of the land on which the 1st Defendant is operating his Petrol Filling Station.
16. I will testify that the Filling Station was formerly operated by the 2nd Defendant who fraudulently sold his interest to the 1st Defendant.
17. I will testify that the Plaintiff brought an action against the 2nd Defendant in Suit NO. L.443/93 entitled COMFORT ODI MANTEAW AND FRANCIS ANNAN V. ALHAJI ALHASSAN YAYAH and the 2nd
Defendant testified that the land subject matter of Suit No. L.443/93 entitled COMFORT ODI MANTEAW AND FRANCIS ANNAN V. ALHAJI ALHASSAN YAYAH is
the land the 2nd Defendant built his Filling Station. I have attached to my witness statement and labelled same as Exhibit “F” are copies of proceedings in Suit No. L443/93 including rulings and trial as well.
18. I will testify that the Plaintiff took steps to protect his interest in the land by the initiation of Suit No. L.443/93 entitled COMFORT ODI MANTEAW AND FRANCIS ANNAN V. ALHAJI ALHASSAN YAYAH but
judgment was not delivered for the reason that the judge that heard the matter died.
19. The Plaintiff will further state that the action is not statute barred at all and that at the trial the Plaintiff will produce evidence of building permit applications, letters from Accra Metropolitan Assembly (AMA) in respect of the land, drawings of buildings the Plaintiff intended to build on the land and other relevant correspondence to substantiate the claim of the Plaintiff. I have attached to my witness statement and labelled same as Exhibit “G” series copies of correspondence from Accra Metropolitan Assembly (Okaikoi Sub-Metropolitan Assembly) dated 9th July, 1998, 24th September, 1998, 6th November, 2002 and the letter dated 16th October, 1998 addressed to 2nd Defendant’s counsel at the time.
20. I will testify that the Plaintiff has been very vigilant from the time the 2nd Defendant wrongfully entered the land and started the construction of the Filling Station which eventually was sold to the 1st Defendant currently in wrongful possession of the land in dispute.
21. The Plaintiff therefore prays this honourable court to enter judgment on his behalf in accordance with the writ of summons and statement of claim.”
2.4 This being a civil case the standard was proof on the preponderance of the probabilities. The law is that the Plaintiff apart from pleading his root of title, mode of acquisition and overt acts of ownership must prove that she is entitled to the declaration sought.
2.5 In AWUKU V. TETTEH (2011) 1SCGLR 366 the court decided that in an action for declaration of title to land, the onus was heavily on the Plaintiff to prove his case.
2.6 In MONDIAL VENEE GH. LIMITED V. AMUAH GYEBU [2011] 1 SCGLR 466 at 475 Her Ladyship the Chief Justice wrote that: “In land litigation, even where living witness who were directly involved in the transaction under reference are produced in court as witnesses, the law requires the person asserting title and on whom the burden of persuasion falls,…to prove the root of his title, mode of acquisition and various acts of possession exercised over the subject-matter of litigation.”
2.7 Again in the case of YAW KWESI V. ARHIN DAVIS & ANOR. [2007-2008] SCGLR 580 it was held that:
“Since the Plaintiff-Appellant sued not only for declaration of title but also for damages for trespass and order for perpetual injunction he assumed the onerous burden of proof of title to the disputed land by the preponderance of the probabilities as required by sections 11(1) and (4) and 12 of the Evidence Act NRCD 323 of 1975.”
2.8 As it is the case of the Plaintiff stood uncontested. A critical examination of Exhibit “C”, a Land Title Certificate depicts the subject-matter land belongs to the Plaintiff and one Comfort Odi-Manteaw.
2.9 In the circumstance, I accordingly enter judgment for the Plaintiff per the reliefs endorsed on his writ of summons minus relief V. In respect of reliefs VI and VII, I award the Plaintiff GhS30,000.00 as Damages and cost of GhS20,000.00 against the Defendants in favour of the Plaintiff.