REPUBLIC vs. CIRCUIT COURT REGISTRAR; EX PARTE ARTHUR [1979]DLCA1104

Date	1979-05-17
Suit No.
Citation No.	[1979]DLCA1104

APALOO C.J.

ANIN J.A.

ANTERKYI J.

MRS. ADUSA-AMANKWA FOR THE APPELLANT.

J. B. SHORT FOR THE RESPONDENT.

[1979]DLCA1104
																																						<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" >REPUBLIC <o:p></o:p>vs. <o:p></o:p>CIRCUIT COURT REGISTRAR; EX PARTE ARTHUR<o:p></o:p>[COURT OF APPEAL, ACCRA] <o:p></o:p>[1978] GLR 309<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:
17 MAY 1979<o:p></o:p>

</div><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>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">

MRS. ADUSA-AMANKWA FOR THE APPELLANT.<o:p></o:p>

J. B. SHORT 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 1.0pt 0in">

APALOO C.J., ANIN J.A. AND ANTERKYI J.<o:p></o:p>

</div><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>JUDGMENT OF APALOO C.J.<o:p></o:p>This
appeal has one unusual feature. The registrar of the circuit court contests an
order made on him by the High Court to issue in favour of a purchaser of
immovable property sold in execution of a judgment, a certificate of purchase.
The right of a purchaser to such a certificate and the duty of the court to
grant it were expressed in mandatory terms by Order 51, r. 21 of the High Court
(Civil Procedure) Rules, 1954 (L.N. 140A). It says, in so far as material,
“After a sale of immovable property shall have become absolute in manner
aforesaid, the Court shall grant a certificate to the person who may have been
declared the purchaser at such sale . . .” (The emphasis is mine.)<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The
respondent, Mary Arthur, claimed that she answered the description of “the
purchaser” contemplated by the rule and applied to the circuit court, registrar
to issue in her favour, such a certificate. The latter declined to do so on the
ground that there was no valid sale in law. That a sale took place as a matter
of fact, was not disputed. In so far as it is possible to extract them from the
record of proceedings, the registrar’s reasons for denying the legal validity
of the sale were two, namely: firstly, that he had suspended the sale, and
secondly, the “auctioneer did not put up fresh notices” before conducting the
sale on 26 August 1975.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The
facts, in the main, are not in dispute. One Mallam Alpha Yousah sued a Madam
Rachel Arku Ankrah in the Circuit Court, Cape Coast, and obtained judgment. As
the judgment-debt was unpaid, the judgment-creditor attached for sale in
execution of the judgment, house No. H.176, Agona Swedru, which belonged to the
judgment-debtor. The registrar, as sheriff, requested the Registrar of the
District Court, Agona Swedru, as deputy sheriff, to “cause the execution to be
put in hand as soon as possible.”<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The
latter instructed one Francis Adjei Asare, a licensed auctioneer of Agona
Swedru, to conduct the sale of the house. The sale was advertised to take place
on 22 August 1975. As no issue was made of it, one must assume that public
notice of this was put up for at least twenty-one days previously in compliance
with Order 51, r. 15 of L.N. 140A. On 13 August 1975, the district court
registrar received from the sheriff at Cape Coast, a letter requesting him to
suspend the projected sale. Although no reason was given for this in the
letter, other evidence led in this case shows that this was done as a
precautionary measure because the judgment-debtor had applied to the court for
stay of execution and offered to pay the judgment-debt by instalments. The
application was due to be heard on 26 August 1975.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The
deputy sheriff accordingly conveyed this request to the auctioneer. As a result
of this, the sale was not carried out. On the date fixed for the motion, the
judgment-debtor failed to turn up. Hence the application was dismissed. The
sheriff therefore by letter of that day requested the deputy sheriff to
instruct the auctioneer to proceed with the execution. That letter was received
and the instruction in it was passed on to the auctioneer that very day. Late
in the afternoon of that day, the sale was carried out. It is common ground
that no fresh notice of the sale was given but intending purchasers were
attracted to the sale by the ringing of a bell.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>