IN THE HIGH ~OURT OF JUSTICE
Snit No . 397 of 1993
Mr . B. J. Allain for Plaintiff
Mr. V. Gill for Defendant
By a writ of Summons indorsed with a Statement o f Claim dated the
25th June, 1993 and filed on the same day the Plaintiff s ought the
(1) A declaration that the Plaintiff as Administrator i s the
owner and legally entitled to the said parce l of l and
registered in the Land Registry as Parcel 1422B 73 .
(2) Possession of the part of the said portion o f l and of
which the Defend~~t i s in possession.
(3) An order of injunction ad interim to restrain the
Defendant by himself, his servants or agent s or
otherwise from entering or rema ining on the Plaintiff ‘s
said lands or any part thereof until fi nal determination
of this Suit.
4) General damages for trespass.
(5) The Costs hereof.
On that same day the Plaintiff also fil an applicat an
erim Injunction supported by an fidavit an unction
o restrain the Defendant, QLS servants, agents lessees or
otherwise from going upon, entering or upon t lands
On the 28th day of July 1993 an appearance was ent on f
On that same day the Interim Injunction on behalf
was granted and it reads:
It is hereby ordered
upon the Plaint~ff’s undertaking as ~o
(1) That the Defendant is restrained from cont to
build on the Plaintiff’s land until further
(2) Return day to be 22nd September 1993.
On the 12th of August 1993 a defence and Counterclaim one set of
eadings) was entered on behalf of the Defendant.
The Defendant’s defence is that a portion of the land was sold to
by one of the heirs of Yvonne Dalsou namely Harold Dalsou and
the Plaintiff was well aware of that sale.
The Defendant’s Counterclaim reads as follows:
(1) A declaration that he is the owner of the portion of
land triangular in shape as per measurement stated on
2) An injunction to restrain the iff by If,
Servants and/or agents from entering upon or on
the Defendant’s land.
(3) Damages trespass.
4) The costs hereof.
On the 29th September 1993 the injunction granted on t 28th of
July 1993 was ordered lito continue unt determination the
case of further order of the Court. II
The matter came to trial on the 29th day April 1996.
Learned Counsel for the Defendant told the Court that was the
new Sclicitor for the Defendant and wished to make an amendment to
paragraph 2 to the defence to insert after figurea 1988 lion the
rection of and with the full knowledge the aintiff who is
now estopped from ascertaining that the Defendant tt any
breach which is denied as alleged or at 1.”
There was no objection to the amendment and it was
Plaintiff gave evidence on his own behalf and told Court
t he was one of the seven children of Yvonne Dalsou who owned a
ece of land at Savannes, in the quarter of Vieux Fort, and which
is registered as Parcel No. 1422B 73; that his mother died fourteen
years IJ4) ago and on the 30th day of April 1993 he was granted
Letters of Administration on her behalf and became Administrator of
piece of land in question. The Deed of Sale of the land in
question, the register of the said Deed of Sale and the Letters of
Administration were all exhibited.
He said that he had the land surveyed in 1993 and a plan
certified as a true copy dated 13th January 1993 known as record
No. 23 of 1993 was also exhibited.
The Plaintiff told the Court that the Defendant was no stranger ~o
him for he is a maternal relative whom he has known for over
years, that he, the Plaintiff lived in the United Kingdom
years and returned to his home land St. Luc in the year 1977 and
it was about five years ago that he observed the Defendant on the
land; that he approached the Defendant concerning s
whereupon the latter told him that he had bought the land from
(Plaintiff’s) brother Harold Dalsou and no one d stop him
from entering and remaining on the land.
The Plaintiff said that he was unaware of that sale to
Defendant by Harold Dalsou and that he himself never promi ,at
any time, to sell any land to the Defendant.
He furth~r said that 1 was undivided and that the
Defendant off the land since he (Defendant) is a trouble maker and
that if his brother Harold was selling his share, ff
would buy it so as to keep the land within family.
Through the Cross Examination of the Plaintiff the Court became
aware that after the death of Yvonne Dalsou (mentioned ier)
relationship between the brothers, i. e. the aintiff and
Harold Dalsou became estranged with the Defendant j on
behalf of Harold against Plaintiff. The aintiff so told
the Court that he saw the Defendant enter into the land built a
plywood house and a concrete platform, a foundation for a second
The Defendant on the other hand gave evidence and said that the
aintiff was his double first cousin (children of two sisters who
married two brothers) .
He further told the Court that he was the one who assisted his aunt
Yvonne Dalsou when she was in the process of purchasing the lands
at Savannes, and in return she sold to him a portion of the said
l and which he in turn sold to Thomas Collymore and Barry Poyott.e s•
(Deeds of Sale exhibited) .
He also told the Court that during the month of December 1988 he
a pproached the Plaintiff to sell to him the Plaint l ff’s share in
Parcel 1422B73 (Vieux Fort ) Whereupon the Plaintiff t old him that
s ince he had children he would not be selling his portion but
advised the Defendant to approach his brother Harold who was in the
process of selling his share to one Rudolph St . Hi lli that he acted
upon the advice of the Plaintiff and purchased Harold’s portion of
Parcel 1422B 73 (Vieux Fort) and he tendered a receipt of the
t ransaction as an exhibit.
He told the Court that he knew the extent of Harold’s portion so
a fter purchase he cleared the l and and placed h~_ :3 d’.’lelling h,ouse on
t he land. He said that SOin after the Plaintiff began legal
proceedings against him.
Under Cross Examination he told the Court that his aunt had no
t itle to the land before her purchase in 1981.
Harold Dalsou confirmed the family relationship between the
Plaintiff and the Defendant and his sel ling of his portion of
Parcel 1422B 73 to the Defendant by receipt i nstead o f by deed of
s ale since the land was not partitioned.
Under Cross Examination this witness inslsted that he knew his
portion of land since his mother had shown him what was to be his
This witness was extensively questioned by the Court since there
appeared to be many inconsistencies with regard the receipt tendered.
This is a simple case of one heir selling undivided land by
receipt. On the 29th day o f Apri l 1996 I delivered a verbal
j udgment and advised the parties in t erms o f t he order now being
made. As stated earlier there i s bad b1 2 ~d between t he Plaintiff,
his brother Harold and the Defendant, but I f ind a s a f act that
Defendant has a valid i nterest in the l and, Parcel 1422B 73 quarter
o f Vieux Fort since he s tepped i nto the s hoes o f Harold.
This beLlg so I hereby declare that the Plain t i ff i s the
Administrator of t he port i on of l and at Savannes Estate Vieux Fort
known as Parcel 1422B73 on behalf of:
Mary Anna Prince nee Paul
Alexandrine Haynes nee Dalsou
Caulita Jankie nee Dalsou
Helen Tobierre nee Dalsou
That the Interim Injunction granted to t he Plaintiff restraining
t he Defendant from continuing to build on the said lands unt i l the
determination of the case is to continue until t he l and is
partitioned or further order.
There will be no order as to Costs.
~ \ ~~
~~ .. ‘ ~~,
· ·· “·”.. . ‘ ·’,~:·:~~.7:-z ·;·~,,-. -; ….. ·: l .. ‘:” : ” I~’~””‘;””” ~-” ”