IN RE YEBOAH (DECD.); DUKU vs. DWUMAH AND ANOTHER [1974]DLHC2288

Date	1974-05-07
Suit No.
Citation No.	[1974]DLHC2288

OWUSU-ADDO J.

K. A. BOAITEY FOR THE APPLICANT.

ROSE TAYLOR FOR THE RESPONDENTS.

[1974]DLHC2288
																																						<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:Times;
mso-bidi-font-family:Times;color:#548DD4;mso-themecolor:text2;mso-themetint:
153">IN RE YEBOAH (DECD.); DUKU <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:Times;
mso-bidi-font-family:Times;color:#548DD4;mso-themecolor:text2;mso-themetint:
153">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:Times;
mso-bidi-font-family:Times;color:#548DD4;mso-themecolor:text2;mso-themetint:
153">DWUMAH AND ANOTHER<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;[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;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[1974] 2 GLR 98<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:
7 MAY 1974.<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">

K. A.
BOAITEY FOR THE APPLICANT.<o:p></o:p>

ROSE
TAYLOR 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">

OWUSU-ADDO J.<o:p></o:p>

</div><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>JUDGMENT OF OWUSU-ADDO J.<o:p></o:p>This
application is brought under Order 70 of the Supreme [High] Court (Civil
Procedure) Rules, 1954 (L.N. 140A), on behalf of the caveator-applicant,
praying for an order to set aside the grant of probate given on 25 September
1973 in respect of the will of the late Kwaku Yeboah to the executors, who will
hereafter be referred to as the respondents.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>In order
to appreciate the arguments canvassed for and against this application, it is
quite necessary to give a brief account of the facts promulgating in this
application. The testator, Kwaku Yeboah, died on 4 May 1973 at a place called
Sekyere in the Ashanti Region leaving a will dated 5 November 1972. After his
burial and observation of all the necessary funeral rites, as is only to be
expected, the respondents, having been appointed executors under the said will,
applied to the High Court, Kumasi, for probate of the will. The application
which came before Sarkodee J. on 25 September 1973 sitting as a vacation judge,
was granted and the will admitted to probate. It turned out that before the
respondents’ application for probate was heard, a caveat had been lodged under
Order 60, r. 14 of L.N. 140A, against the estate of the deceased on 24
September 1973, the day before the grant of probate. It is not in dispute that
the caveat was not brought to the knowledge of the learned judge before he
admitted the deceased’s will to probate. In the meantime the respondents had
paid the estate duty on 8 October 1973 before they were notified of the caveat.
Subsequently, the learned counsel for the respondents caused a warning to issue
to the caveator who filed an affidavit of interest on 24 January 1974, exactly
a week after the present application had been filed. However, before the
hearing of this application a writ of summons seeking to establish the will
against the caveator had been issued on behalf of the respondents.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>On 1
February 1974 an appearance was entered on behalf of the caveator. In the
present application the main contention of learned counsel for the caveator is
that on 24 September 1973 a caveat had been filed in anticipation of an
application for probate in respect of the estate of Kwaku Yeboah. He placed
much reliance on Order 60, r. 15 of L.N. 140A which reads as follows:<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">“If [a
caveat is] filed prior to any application for probate or letters of
administration, it shall be brought to the notice of the Court by the Registrar
as soon as any such application is filed, and the Court shall then direct the
Registrar to bring such caveat to the notice of the applicant, and shall
decline to take any steps until the applicant duly warns the caveator in the
manner hereinafter provided.”<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>I am of
the view however that the applicable rule in this situation is rather rule 16
of the aforementioned Order since the filing of the application for probate
preceded the caveat. It reads:<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">“16.
Where the caveat is filed after any application for probate or letters of
administration it shall at once be brought to the notice of the Court by the
Registrar. No further steps may then be taken with respect to the application
for probate or letters of administration, but a notice in the form set out in
Form 20, Appendix J, shall forthwith be sent by the Registrar to the applicant
or his solicitor.”<o:p></o:p>