Trasacco Furniture and Jeleel have been in court over land litigation
The Supreme Court by a unanimous decision has dismissed an application by Jeleel Company Ghana Limited.
Notwithstanding the Court's decision, Jeleel and persons believed to be land guards defied the Court's order and recently physically assaulted security personnel of Trasacco Furniture.
They succeeded in injuring three security persons of Trasacco Furniture, who were treated and discharged at the Pantang Hospital.
A few days ago, the same company, Jeleel, allegedly set an excavator belonging to Trasacco ablaze, when Trasacco furniture decided to begin its operations on the land.
It took the timely intervention of the Ghana Fire Service and Police officers to restore order in the community.
Later, they struck again; seized the excavator and burnt it to ashes at midnight.
As a result of Jaleel's recent assault on the security persons, it has sent wrong signals of fear and panic among residents in the area.
The applicant is seeking declaration and recovery of possession of an about 11 acre parcel land lying and situate at Adentan with named boundaries.
They wanted a relief against the defendant, Trassaco which also included an order directed at the Lands Commission to expunge any recorded transactions affecting the land in dispute.
The High Court had earlier entered a final judgement in favour of the applicant herenin in respect of their claims but reserved its reason to the October 15, 2019.
After the delivery of the High Court in favour of the applicant they applied to the High Court for a Writ of Possession which appears to have been executed even though the boundaries of the land had not been specified anywhere in the judgment of the High Court referred to supra.
It is the case of the Applicant that, long after the above judgment had been executed and the Applicants placed in possession, the Respondent herein, who was not a party in the trial at the High Court applied to the High Court, differently constituted on 2nd July 2020 for a stay of execution and to set aside the Writ of Possession that had been granted to Jeleel by the High Court.
But the Supreme Court dismissed the application for stay of execution to obtain leave before filing the appeal fails, the application for the Stay of Execution is however dismissed on a more substantive ground of failure to comply with mandatory requirement provided in order 43 r(3)which is fundamental to substances of the application
The application of the stay of execution thus failed.