An Accra High Court has issued a two-month ultimatum to the former Chief Executive of the Korle-Bu Teaching Hospital, Professor Kwabena Frimpong-Boateng, and five others to provide 445 health workers with registered documents covering plots of land they made contributions to buy or refund their money to them.The health workers sued Prof. Frimpong-Boateng, Dr B.D.R T. Annan, Director of Medical Affairs, Christopher Nartey, Director of Administration, Emmanuel E.B. Kakabaah, Director of Finance, Alex Arhin, secretary of Oyibi Land Committee, as well as the Korle-Bu Teacning Hospital in May 2007 for alleged fraud.However, in his ruling on Thursday, the presiding judge, Mr Justice Lartey Young, dismissed any element of fraud in the suit, but awarded GH ¢100 cost each against the defendants.He also directed Prof Frimpong- Boateng and the five others to put the health workers in possession of the lands, which they have paid for, and asked those workers who have arrears in payment to settle it to enable the defendants to hand over their documents to them.The workers, including 42 doctors of the hospital, claimed that the defendants failed to give them plots of land they made contributions to buy from them at Oyibi, near Accra.According to them, they paid ¢8 million (GH¢800.00) per plot, noting that the .first deposit fee of GH¢ 100 was paid in February 2004 while the balance of ¢7 million (GH¢700.00) was spread over a period of 11 months.They said the monies were deducted at source to meet the payment of their respective plots and in the process, the price per plot was increased to ¢ 10 million (GH¢lOO0.OO) including additional ¢2 million (GH¢200.00) charged each of the plaintiffs to support administrative and documentation processes.The plaintiffs said after completion of full payment, the defendants organised batches of field trips to the land to show them their respective plots and some of them were issued with documents which were withdrawn by the defendants because they were found to be fake.They said after waiting for a while without getting their plots of land, they wrote reminders to the defendants but they received no favourable response and added, "by giving the plaintiffs the impression that the defendants had control, management and ownership of the land which they apparently did not and to which they invited the plaintiffs to make payments, the defendants have wilfully defrauded the plaintiffs."By organising trips for the plaintiffs to view the land, thus assuring them of the legitimacy of the entire transaction, and failing to fulfil their part of the bargain, the defendants ought to be deemed to have defrauded the plaintiffs."Source: Times