Home » WACA Cases » Julius Noi Tetteyfio & Anor V. Daniel Christopher Awuku (1955) LJR-WACA

Julius Noi Tetteyfio & Anor V. Daniel Christopher Awuku (1955) LJR-WACA

Julius Noi Tetteyfio & Anor V. Daniel Christopher Awuku (1955)

LawGlobal Hub Judgment Report – West African Court of Appeal

Real Property—Mortgage—Subsequent sale by mortgagor and order for specific performance and conveyance—Sale by mortgagee—Neither purchaser aware of mortgagor’sfraud—Position as between purchaser from mortgagee and purchaser from mortgagor.

Facts

The owner first mortgaged the property to N.O. by deed; later he sold it to the respondent, who sued him for specific performance and obtained judgment and a conveyance. After that first mortgage to N.O., the first appellant paid the debt to N.O. and the owner gave the first appellant a mortgage by deed; the first appellant put up the property for sale and the second appellant bought it.

The order of events was as follows:—
(1) Mortgage by deed by the owner to N.O.;
(2) Sale by the owner (now mortgagor) to the respondent;
(3) Mortgage by deed by the owner to the first appellant;
(4) Order for specific performance of the sale mentioned in (2) and conveyance to the respondent.

The two appellants acted bona fide, so did the respondent; on the evidence none of them knew of the fraud perpetrated by the owner.

The respondent as plaintiff sued the original owner as defendant No. 1 and the two appellants as defendants No. 2 and No. 3, for a declaration of title and trespass and obtained judgment, and the defendants No. 2 and No. 3 appealed.

Briefly put, the trial Judge took the view that the order for specific performance overrode all other transactions.

See also  Foday Massaquoi V. Paramount Chief Yamba Kunyafoi (1937) LJR-WACA

Held

There being no evidence that the appellants acted otherwise than bona fide, the equities must be held to be equal and the law prevails: the owner had not the title either when he purported to sell the property to the respondent, or when the respondent in his earlier action against the owner obtained a decree for specific performance, or when the conveyance was made to the respondent under that decree; the first appellant had the legal estate and was within his rights in selling the property as mortgagee, and the second appellant was a bona fide purchaser for value without notice of any impediment on the title; therefore the appeal would be allowed.


Appeal allowed; judgment entered for the appellants.

More Posts

Section 47 EFCC Act 2004: Short Title

Section 47 EFCC Act 2004 Section 47 of the EFCC Act 2004 is about Short Title. This Act may be cited as the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (Establishment,

Section 46 EFCC Act 2004: Interpretation

Section 46 EFCC Act 2004 Section 46 of the EFCC Act 2004 is about Interpretation. In this Act – Interpretation “Commission” means the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission established

Section 45 EFCC Act 2004: Savings

Section 45 EFCC Act 2004 Section 45 of the EFCC Act 2004 is about Savings. The repeal of the Act specified in section 43 of this Act shall not

Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

LawGlobal Hub is your innovative global resource of law and more. We ensure easy accessibility to the laws of countries around the world, among others