Home Of Ghana News Ghana News, Entertainment And More
The Techiman High Court, presided over by His Lordship Justice Kwame Gyamfi Osei, has granted an interlocutory injunction in favor of Sariki Fanyinama III in a landmark land dispute concerning a five-mile radius boundary around the Kintampo Old Post Office.
The ruling, delivered on Tuesday, June 17, 2025, restrains the defendants, Abdul Fattah Mahmud, Mansur Abdul Azziz, and Nana Kwabena Bisakwan II from selling, transferring, or creating any interest in the disputed land until the final determination of the case.
The Plaintiff, Sariki Fanyinama III, in his amended writ, sought three key reliefs from the Court: A declaration that the defendants and their agents are bound by the 1924 Kintampo Agreement and a 1952 government decision affirming the five-mile jurisdiction of the Plaintiff’s stool land with the Kintampo Old Post Office as the reference point, a declaration that the defendants are legally estopped from laying claim to any part of the said land and general damages for trespass.
According to the ruling, the 1st and 2nd defendants did not file opposing affidavits, but the 3rd defendant, Nana Kwabena Bisakwan II, strongly contested the injunction. He argued that the historical agreements referenced by the Plaintiff did not confer ownership rights but rather served administrative purposes under the colonial local government system. Nana Kwabena Bisakwan II further claimed that the land in question belonged to the Nkoranza and Mo traditional authorities, and that an injunction would cause hardship to hundreds of occupants.
“The 1st and 2nd Defendant/Respondents did not file any affidavit implying they are not opposed to same. The 3rd Defendant/Respondent is however vehemently opposed to the application. His reason for opposing same is that the Plaintiff/Applicant is not the owner of the disputed land spanning the purported five miles radius from the Kintampo Post Office. According the 3rd Defendant/Respondent the said meeting alluded to by the Plaintiff/Applicant was just to discuss the position of Kintampo under the new local Government setup and not to confirm the geographical identity of the Fanyinama Stool as Fanyinama has no stool. He contends that from Kintampo Township to the Black Volta on the East and West are owned by the Nkoranza and Mo Stools and this is confirmed by exhibits NK1, NK2 and NK3.” The rulling stated.
However, the Court found the opposition unconvincing. While acknowledging that the Plaintiff’s documentation did not conclusively prove ownership at this stage, the Court stressed that an interlocutory injunction does not require proof of absolute ownership but rather a demonstration of a serious question to be tried. The judge ruled that the balance of convenience favored preserving the status quo.
“As I have already indicated supra, this application is being determined by suppositions and assumptions or on its face value, hence if the unproven claims by the Plaintiff/Applicant and the unproven claims of the 3rd Defendant/Respondent are juxtaposed, a reasonable mind would form the opinion that it would be just and convenient to restrain the Defendants/Respondents whether by themselves, their covenant, privies, successors-in-title etc from selling, disposing off or creating interest in assigns, 5 miles radius from the Kintampo Post Office until the final determination of the suit and which I hereby do.” The rulling stated.
The Court further explained the need to prevent any potential prejudice to the Plaintiff’s legal or equitable rights pending final judgment. The Plaintiff has been ordered to provide a written undertaking within one month to indemnify the Defendants if it is later established that he was not entitled to the relief.
“The Plaintiff/Applicant shall give a written undertaking within one month from today to indemnify the Defendants/Applicants if at the end of the case it turns out that he was not entitled to this order.”
The legal team for the Plaintiff, Sariki Fanyinama III, was led by Philomena Asantewaa, holding brief for Nana Obiri Boahen, while the 3rd Defendant was represented by William Orleans Oduro and David Orleans Oduro.
Source: Ghanaweb.mobi
