POKU vs. KRAH [1985]DLHC960

Date	1985-07-11
Suit No.
Citation No.	[1985]DLHC960

WUAKU J

A A OWUSU FOR THE APPELLANT.

KOFI OPPONG FOR THE RESPONDENT.

[1985]DLHC960
																																						<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" ><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">

POKU <o:p></o:p>

{HIGH COURT, SUNYANI} <o:p></o:p>

[1984-86] 2 GLR 406<o:p></o:p>

DATE:
11 JULY 1985<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">

A
A OWUSU FOR THE APPELLANT. <o:p></o:p>

KOFI
OPPONG 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">

WUAKU J<o:p></o:p>

</div><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>JUDGMENT OF WUAKU J<o:p></o:p>The
plaintiff-respondent instituted the action herein against the defendant-appellant.
The claim 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">“(1) The plaintiff seeks a
declaration that half of the land at Wawase which originally belonged to the
late Kwabena Donkor as described in clause 14 of the last will of the said
Kwabena Donkor is family property. <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) A declaration of title to and
possession of that half of the land as described in the said will. <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">(3) Perpetual injunction to
restrain the defendant, his assigns, agents and successors from having anything
to do with the land.”<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>Before
the hearing was commenced in the court below the defendant filed a motion
praying for an order of transfer of the suit to the High Court because the
subject matter involved the interpretation of a will. The magistrate heard the
motion and in his ruling said, among other things, that:<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">“since a
will is involved in this matter; I would transmit the docket of this suit to
the supervising High Court judge, Sunyani for advice as to whether the case can
be tried in this court or in the High Court. The registrar of this court should
carry out this order accordingly.”<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The
matter was duly referred to the supervising High Court judge, Sunyani. The
advice the supervising High Court judge gave was quoted in the magistrate’s
judgment. It is this:<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">&nbsp;“On 5 March 1984 the High Court registrar on
the instruction of the supervising High Court judge wrote to the registrar of
this court, inter alia, that ‘whether the land is a family property is a matter
of fact and does not involve any interpretation of the will. In the opinion of
his lordship the district magistrate has the jurisdiction to try the case.”’<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>Clothed
with this authority the magistrate went on to hear the case, and on the merits
gave judgment for the plaintiff. The defendant is dissatisfied with that
judgment and has appealed against the decision.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>Among the
several grounds filed was supplementary ground (4) which reads “The learned
magistrate exceeded his jurisdiction when he set out to interpret clause 14 of
exhibit A.” Exhibit A is the will. The ground in my opinion r</main>