STATE vs. KPANDU LOCAL COURT MAGISTRATE; EX PARTE KONKONG [1967]DLHC1544

Date	1967-05-15
Suit No.
Citation No.	[1967]DLHC1544

KINGSLEY-NYINAH J.

AGGREY-GIKUNOO FOR THE APPLICANT.

I. N. K. WUAKU FOR THE RESPONDENTS.

[1967]DLHC1544
																																						<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" >STATE<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;vs. <o:p></o:p>KPANDU LOCAL COURT MAGISTRATE; EX PARTE KONKONG <o:p></o:p>[HIGH COURT, ACCRA]<o:p></o:p>[1967] GLR 334<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 MAY 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">

AGGREY-GIKUNOO FOR THE APPLICANT.<o:p></o:p>

I. N. K. WUAKU FOR THE RESPONDENTS.<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">

KINGSLEY-NYINAH J.<o:p></o:p>

</div><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>JUDGMENT OF KINGSLEY-NYINAH J.<o:p></o:p>On or
about 15 June 1966, the applicant herein (as the plaintiff), sued the first and
second respondents herein (as the defendants) before his worship Mr. M. C. B.
Agbettoh, the first respondent herein as the presiding magistrate. The claim
was 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">“(a) Title
to ownership. <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">(b)
Recovery and possession of ‘Bisawuo-Vehoe’ land trespassed unto by the
defendants. (c) £G100 or ¢240.00 damages for trespass committed by defendants
thereon ...”<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The writ
then proceeded to describe the extent and boundaries of the parcel of land
trespassed upon, as well also as its value. The third and fourth respondents
were later joined to the suit as co-defendants. A week later, when the very
same matter came up before, the local court magistrate, Mr. M. C. B. Agbettoh
(the first respondent herein) a letter was received by the court praying that
the matter, then properly before the local court, be taken out for settlement.
The proceedings of that day, 22 June 1966, are so important that I here quote
them at length:<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">“Note:
Both parties in court. A letter dated 22 June 1966 written by the Paramount
Chief of the Ve Traditional Area, signed by himself prayed the court that both
parties have agreed to settle their differences from the court for settlement
before him, the paramount chief and that the court should stop proceeding on
the case. Asked if they agreed on what was alleged by the paramount chief in
his letter, both parties answered in the affirmative and expressed that they
were applying for leave of the court for settlement of their differences out of
the court.<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">Court:
The application is granted. Order: This case is settled out of court and I have
directed that it be removed from the list of the court.”<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>Following
this, and on 23 July 1966, the matter was taken out of court to the Ve
Traditional Area arbitral board for the settlement agreed upon by both the
applicant herein and the defendants and the co-defendants-respondents to this
instant application. Both parties having submitted themselves to the
jurisdiction of the arbitral board, the matter was duly arbitrated upon by
Togbuiga Delume VI, Paramount Chief of the Ve Traditional Area. The arbitration
award was duly published on or about 9 August 1966.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>A few
weeks later, however, that is on 16 September 1966, the co-respondents herein
who had consented to the arbitration and submitted to the jurisdiction of the
board, applied to the very same Kpandu Local Court which had ordered that the
very same matter “be removed from the list-of the court,” to set aside the
arbitration award and proceedings for irregularities which, the co-respondents
claimed, had vitiated and nullified the entire proceedings and award.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>Without
calling any of the arbitrators to answer to the respondents’ charges of
irregularities, but relying solely upon the affidavit of complaint lodged by
the co-respondents, and what he heard from both sides, the local magistrate
allowed the application and ordered, on 16 September 1966, that the arbitration
award of the Ve Traditional Area arbitrary court, be set aside.<o:p></o:p>