MADJOUB vs. JOHN HOLT BARTHOLOMEW & CO. LTD. AND OTHERS [1967]DLHC1514

Date	1967-08-15
Suit No.
Citation No.	[1967]DLHC1514

ANNAN J.

H. W. KOFI SACKEY FOR THE PLAINTIFF.

MENSAH-BONSU FOR THE DEFENDANTS.

[1967]DLHC1514
																																						<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" >MADJOUB <o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;JOHN HOLT BARTHOLOMEW &amp; CO.
LTD. AND OTHERS <o:p></o:p>[HIGH COURT, KUMASI]<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp; [1967] GLR 554<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">

DATE:
15 AUGUST 1967.<o:p></o:p>

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

H. W. KOFI SACKEY FOR THE PLAINTIFF.<o:p></o:p>

MENSAH-BONSU FOR THE DEFENDANTS.<o:p></o:p>

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

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

</div><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>JUDGMENT OF ANNAN J.<o:p></o:p>The
plaintiff’s claim is for:<o:p></o:p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt;
margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;border:none;mso-padding-alt:
31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt;mso-border-shadow:yes">(1) A
declaration that the sale by public auction on 16 September 1963 of the
property situate at plot No. 24 Block P, Ayigya, Kumasi (formerly known as Plot
Nos. 2, 3, 4, and 5 Ayigya, Kumasi) to the third defendant by the second
defendant at the instance of W. Bartholomew &amp; Co., Ltd. of Kumasi, the
predecessors of the first defendant is void and of no legal effect whatsoever.<o:p></o:p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt;
margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;border:none;mso-padding-alt:
31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt;mso-border-shadow:yes">(2)
Damages for the said unlawful sale.<o:p></o:p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt;
margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;border:none;mso-padding-alt:
31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt;mso-border-shadow:yes">(3) An
order for the defendants to account to the plaintiff for all the rents which
have accrued out of the said house from 16 September 1963 until the date of
judgment.<o:p></o:p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt;
margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;border:none;mso-padding-alt:
31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt;mso-border-shadow:yes">(4) An
order for the defendants to return to the plaintiff the furniture, fittings and
fixtures in the said house and for damages for the wrongful use of the said furniture,
fixtures and fittings.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The
action arose as a result of the sale by public auction under a writ of fi. fa.
of the premises described in the writ together with certain movables in it
consisting mainly of various items of furniture. The sale was at the request of
the predecessors of the first defendants and the property was sold by the
second defendant, a licensed auctioneer, on the instructions of the deputy
sheriff and was bought by the third defendant. The predecessors of the first
defendant had obtained judgment against a partnership company, Messrs. Fattal
and Madjoub, of which the plaintiff was a member, in the sum of £G1,350 with
costs of £G46 3s. on 28 November 1960 and in the execution of that judgment
applied to the deputy sheriff to seal a writ of fieri facias against Messrs.
Fattal and Madjoub. The papers submitted to the deputy sheriff consisted of the
praecipe, the writ of fi. fa. and the particulars of the property required to
be attached.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>Before
the sale, the deputy sheriff gave public notice for the statutory period, but
on the advertised date of the sale, i.e. on 2 September 1963, the auctioneer,
the second defendant, postponed the sale from that date to 16 September 1963
and the sale took place on the latter date when the building with the furniture
in it was knocked down to the third defendant for £G2,750. There is no dispute
that the entire interest of the partnership company in the premises and its
contents were sold at one go by the second defendant to the third defendant.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The praecipe
submitted to the deputy sheriff by the solicitors for the judgment creditors
was in the usual terms and requested him to “seal a writ of fieri facias
directed to the deputy sheriff, Kumasi, against the defendants-judgment-debtors
Messrs. Fattal and Madjoub . . .” The writ which accompanied the praecipe, was
that used for execution in a case of movable property and the form appropriate
for use in the case of immovable property or both types of property was not
used by the solicitors for the judgment creditors and there was no amendment of
the writ before it was sealed. However, in the particulars attached to the
writ, the solicitors described the property to be attached under the writ as:<o:p></o:p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt;
margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;border:none;mso-padding-alt:
31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt;mso-border-shadow:yes">“All and
singular the right t</main>