BADU vs. ATTA KWADJO AND OTHERS [1971]DLHC2090

Date	1971-07-05
Suit No.
Citation No.	[1971]DLHC2090

ANTERKYI J.

DR. I. L. OHENE-DJAN FOR THE PLAINTIFF.

W.Y. OPPONG FOR THE FIRST SECOND AND THIRD DEFENDANTS.

AWUKU YEBOAH FOR THE FOURTH DEFENDANT.

[1971]DLHC2090
																																						<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" >BADU <o:p></o:p>vs. <o:p></o:p>ATTA KWADJO AND OTHERS <o:p></o:p>[HIGH COURT,
SUNYANI]<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;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[1971] 2 GLR 346<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:
5 JULY 1971.<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">

DR. I. L.
OHENE-DJAN FOR THE PLAINTIFF.<o:p></o:p>

W.Y.
OPPONG FOR THE FIRST, SECOND AND THIRD DEFENDANTS.<o:p></o:p>

AWUKU
YEBOAH FOR THE FOURTH DEFENDANT.<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">

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

</div><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>JUDGMENT OF ANTERKYI J.<o:p></o:p>By his
writ filed on 6 October 1969 the plaintiff’s claim “against the defendants is
for an order to set aside the purported sale of the plaintiff’s cocoa farm ...
by the second defendant on the alleged instructions of the third and fourth
defendants to the first defendant and (2) N¢200.00 damages for trespass.”<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>Upon a
summons for directions being taken out, the court granted the plaintiff’s
application under the Supreme [High] Court (Civil Procedure) Rules, 1954 (L.N.
140A), Order 25, rr. 2 and 3 for an order setting down for hearing and disposal
(before trial) the points of law raised in the pleadings, i.e. in paragraph (7)
of the statement of claim, and in paragraphs (6) and (7) of the reply to the
statement of defence, and paragraphs (2) and (5) of the summons for directions
which are substantially these:<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)
Whether or not L.I. 619 prevented the third defendant from going into execution
while appeal is pending.<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)
Whether or not under Order 42, rule 46, the third defendant could lawfully
cause the plaintiff’s immovable property to be auctioned without exhausting his
movable properties.”<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>During
the hearing of the arguments the following were the undenied facts in respect
of which the legal points raised were to be disposed of, after the necessary
evidence had been received to establish the facts about dates on which were
taken certain steps relative to the proceedings and order and execution arising
out of the institution of a civil action before the District Court Grade II,
Offinso, entitled “Kofi Badu (the present plaintiff) v. Alfred Kwame Mensah
(the present third defendant).”<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>In the
instant case, when after several adjournments the plaintiff had applied to have
his action discontinued, the trial court made the following order on 25 March
1969 as appeared at p. 6 exhibit A, certified copy of the proceedings, in the
District Court Grade II, Offinso:<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">“By
court: Case struck out for lack of prosecution as per letter for discontinuance
with full costs N¢300.00 to cover all costs including the cost awarded for
defendant (N¢25.00) on 28 January 1969 with liberty for fresh action.
Injunction order is discharged. (Sgd.) I.K. Marful District Magistrate Grade
II.”<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>Thus by
this order dated 25 March 1969 N¢300.00 costs were awarded i</main>