MOULD vs. DEVINE [1962]DLHC1599

Date	1962-06-29
Suit No.
Citation No.	[1962]DLHC1599

JIAGGE J.

T. A. NELSON-COFIE FOR THE APPLICANT.

MISS MARIAN A. KUFFOUR FOR THE RESPONDENT.

[1962]DLHC1599
																																						<div class="restriction-wrapper">
														<div class="container-lg">
															<div class="row">
																<div class="col-md-12 restricted-content">
																	<div class="restricted-content-img-wrapper">
																		<div class="lock-icon bounce-7">
																			<img class=""
																				src="https://www.dennislawgh.com/dl-assets/dl-images/lock-content.png"
																				alt="Subscription based content">
																		</div>
																	</div>
																	 
																		<a href="https://www.dennislawgh.com/login"
																		class="btn btn-primary btn-lg"
																		style="font-family: 'open sans'; text-transform: capitalize; border-radius: 8px"> 
																		Login to Read Full Case </a>
																	 
																	
																</div>
															</div>
														</div>
													</div>
													<main id="main" class="content" style="min-height: 60rem" ><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;
mso-fareast-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;
color:#548DD4">MOULD <o:p></o:p><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;
mso-fareast-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;
color:#548DD4">vs. <o:p></o:p><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;
mso-fareast-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;
color:#548DD4">DEVINE <o:p></o:p>[HIGH COURT, ACCRA]<o:p></o:p>[1962] 1 GLR 533<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid black 1.5pt;
padding:31.0pt 31.0pt 1.0pt 31.0pt;mso-border-shadow:yes">

DATE:<span style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;
mso-fareast-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;
color:#00B0F0"> 29TH JUNE, 1962.<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:&nbsp;&nbsp; <o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid black 1.5pt;
padding:0in 0in 0in 0in">

T.
A. NELSON-COFIE FOR THE APPLICANT.<o:p></o:p>

MISS
MARIAN A. KUFFOUR FOR THE RESPONDENT.<o:p></o:p>

</div>CORAM: <o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid black 1.5pt;
padding:0in 0in 6.0pt 0in">

JIAGGE J.<o:p></o:p>

</div><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>JUDGMENT OF
JIAGGE J<o:p></o:p>This is an application for an order of mandamus to compel the
engineer-in-charge, Accra Waterworks to open or cause to be opened or reconnect
or cause to be reconnected, water pipe Folio 1823, situate at House No. A
162/3, Sackey Ansah Road, Korle Gonno, Accra.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The affidavit in support of this application states that applicant
took an action against Mr. A. C. de Vine for recovery of possession of House
No. A.162/3; property in the said house was revested in her by virtue of a
judgment of the court dated the 8th November, 1961. The applicant claimed that
at the time she built the house in question she caused a water pipe to be
connected to it, but that the water had been disconnected at the time of the
judgment vesting title in her. She sent ten shillings as a reconnection fee,
but the engineer-in-charge refused to reconnect, unless she paid an outstanding
bill of £G12 2s. 6d. against Mr. de Vine who had the premises until the
declaration of title was made in favour of applicant on the 8th November, 1961.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The applicant claimed that the house was transferred to her by an
order of the court and that her liabilities thereto commenced from the date of
the court’s order, but not before; that the previous owner Mr. de Vine was
permitted to collect rent from the house up to the date of judgment and was the
person to pay the outstanding bill of the Water Supply Division. It was argued
that an order for mandamus could lie only for the performance of a public duty
and that reconnecting water to a private house was no public duty; that the
Water Works Ordinance imposed no duty to connect or reconnect water to private
buildings. It was argued further that the order for mandamus could not lie as
the engineer, Water Supply, was the servant of the Crown (Republic). Counsel
for respondent however filed no affidavit. The applicant tendered exhibits
A1-A5 which came from the chief engineer, in reply to the application for
reconnection.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>It was argued that the applicant was the original owner of the
house, and the water was installed in the house at her request. The applicant
was dispossessed of the house by a court action and Mr. de Vine became the
owner, and that the judgment revesting the premises in the applicant was served
on the engineer, Water Supply and that exhibit A2 from him showed that the
engineer received the judgment. According to this judgment Agnes Mould v. A. C.
de Vine all liabilities up to the 31st October, 1961 lay on the previous owner,
A. C. de Vine. It was argued that there was no agreement between the previous
owner and the applicant in respect of the money due to the Water Supply
Department, and that the applicant could not be held responsible for the
liabilities of the previous owner.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The Water Supply Authority, however, is a Division of Public
Construction and the only authority that can supply water in this country. It
has a monopoly of water supply for the whole country. The Water Supply
Authority has a duty to the public to supply water and must show good cause why
water should not be supplied to any member of the public. The duty to be performed
by the Water Supply Authority is a public nature and non-performance of it
affects the applicant adversely. The Water Supply Authority, by section 39 of
the Waterworks Ordinance has, the power to take a civil action for money due to
the authority but it chose to refuse a legitimate demand for reconnection of
water. An order of mandamus is one requiring an act to be done and may be made
where a body charged with a public duty to do an act has failed to do so. The
applicant has a legal right to have water reconnected to her premises and is
therefore entitled to such an order.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>