the disputes which could arise relative to land or an interest in land under the Land Title Registration Law, 1986 (PNDCL 152) and in respect of which section 12(1) provided that no action should be commenced in any court until the procedures to settling such disputes under PNDCL 152 had been exhausted were disputes relating to (i) conflicting as provided under section 23(6) of PNDCL 152; (ii) conflicting Land Registry Act, 1962 (Act 122) registered instrument as provided under section 13(2); (iii) the registrar refusal to register an applicant as provided under section 21(2); and (iv) the accuracy and situation of land on the registry maps and plans as provided under section 37(2). Under those provisions the specified disputes were in the first instance referred to the adjudication committee set up under section 22 of PNDCL 152. However, under section 22(3) and (4) of PNDCL 152, the jurisdiction of the adjudication committee was limited to the determination of any dispute relating to the registration of land or interest in land in any registration district. The adjudication committee was therefore a purely internal or domestic tribunal and not one with general jurisdiction to handle any land suit in a registration district. It was not subject to the procedures and technicalities of the court and it was only where there was an appeal to the High Court from a final decision of the committee that section 33(2) of PNDCL 5 12 mandated the registrar to enter the contents of the adjudicating record in the land register and other records of the registry. It was therefore clear from the prescribed jurisdiction, procedure and effect of the decision of the adjudication committee that it was not intended to assume the jurisdiction of the courts in land suits in a registration district. Accordingly, the ban on taking actions in the courts imposed in section 12(1) of PNDCL 152 was restricted solely to actions relating to disputes arising in the courts of the Land Title Registry’s exercise of registering such titles to land and interest therein. Accordingly, if a dispute arose outside the registration exercise of the registry then, notwithstanding that the area had been declared a registration district, the court was the proper forum for its determination. In the result, section 12(1) of PNDCL 152 did not oust the jurisdiction of any court, let alone the High Court, in land suits in a registration district. Dictum of Aikins JSC in Kasser v Raziel Construction Ltd [1993-94] I GLR 332 at 340, SC cited. Amar v Mireku, Court of Appeal, 9 December 1993, unreported and Paul v IGIC Ltd, High Court, Accra, 14 July 1995 unreported overruled.