BUZU AND ANOTHER vs. NUHO [1976]DLHC372

Date	1976-01-22
Suit No.
Citation No.	[1976]DLHC372

QUASHIE-SAM J.

O. AMPOFO FOR THE APPELLANTS.

W. A. H. AMARTEIFIO FOR THE RESPONDENT.

[1976]DLHC372
																																						<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" >BUZU AND ANOTHER <o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;NUHO<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;[HIGH
COURT, SEKONDI]<o:p></o:p>[1976] 1 GLR 123<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in 0in 0in 0in">

DATE:
22 JANUARY 1976.<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">

O. AMPOFO FOR THE APPELLANTS.<o:p></o:p>

W. A. H. AMARTEIFIO 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 windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in 0in 0in 0in">

QUASHIE-SAM J.<o:p></o:p>

</div><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>JUDGMENT OF QUASHIE-SAM J.<o:p></o:p>The
plaintiff sued the defendants for title to a coconut plantation and damages for
trespass. On 1 April 1975 the District Court Grade II, Prestea, gave judgment
for the plaintiff. On 9 April 1975 a notice of appeal was filed which gave
notice that the defendants being dissatisfied with the decision of the District
Court Grade II, Prestea, contained in the judgment of Mr. S. S. Adani and dated
1 April 1975 intended to appeal to the High Court, Sekondi. This notice of
appeal was marked and thumbprinted by only the second defendant under whose
execution were inscribed the words: “for and on behalf of the first defendant
or appellant.”<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>When the
appeal came to be heard on 10 December 1975, learned counsel for the plaintiff,
referring to the notice of intention to appeal, observed that both defendants
as intending appellants should have signed the notice of appeal. He submitted,
as a preliminary objection, that the second defendant, Nuho Zabrama, having
alone signed or thumbprinted it, he, in law, must be regarded as the only
appellant as in law he cannot purport to sign for the other intended appellant.
He further submitted that that being the position, the additional grounds of
appeal filed by counsel and designated “for the defendants/appellants” must be
deemed in law to be on behalf of the second defendant, Nuho Zabrama, as the
only appellant in the case. Learned counsel for the plaintiff relied on three
cases for his preliminary objection, namely, (1) Yegbor v. Dorgah [1963] 1
G.L.R. 42; (Frimpong v. Poku [1963] 2 G.L.R. 1, S.C. and (3) Muffat v. Kpeshie
II (1952) 14 W.A.C.A 44.<o:p></o:p>In reply,
learned counsel for the defendants argued that there is nothing under Order 58,
r. 1 of the High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules, 1954 (L.N. 140A), which
prohibits one appellant alone signing a notice of appeal on behalf of himself
and a co-appellant with whom the former has a common interest in a case. He
contended that in this instant case, the notice of appeal clearly shows that
the appeal was lodged by both defendants and that the signature of any one of the
defendants is enough to authenticate the notice of appeal on behalf of the
other defendant who did not sign it.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>In the
Yegbor case (supra) cited by learned counsel for the plaintiff the appeal was
purported to have been brought under the then Native Courts &nbsp;(Southern Section of Togoland) Ordinance, Cap.
106 (1951 Rev.), and regulation 118 (1) and (2) of the Native Courts (Southern
Section of Togoland) Procedure Regulations, 1953 (L.N. 76), Vol. VIII (1954
Rev.), p. 847 made under that Ordinance.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>Regulation
118 (1) provided 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">“118. (1)
Any person wishing to appeal from an order or decision of a Native Court shall
file in the Native Court and lodge in the Appeal Court a Notice of Intention to
Appeal and such Notices shall be filed and lodged within one month of the date
of the order or decision appealed against.”<o:p></o:p>The
appropriate form for appeal as set out at p. 883, Form 20 was:<o:p></o:p>“TAKE
NOTICE that I, being a party to the above cause was decided by the
...................................... Native Court on the
......................... day of ................ 19 ....... and being
aggrieved by the said decision do intend to appeal to the
....................... Court. Dated at
...........................................this ............................day
of ..................................... 19 ..........
....................................... <o:p></o:p><sp</main>