OTEMA vs. ASANTE [1991]DLHC2052

Date	1991-08-26
Suit No.
Citation No.	[1991]DLHC2052

LUTTERODT J.

NEILS LUTTERODT FOR THE FIRST AND SECOND DEFENDANT-APPLICANTS.

ANTWI ABANKWA FOR THE PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT.

[1991]DLHC2052
																																						<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:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;
color:#00B0F0">OTEMA<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:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;
color:#00B0F0">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:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;
color:#00B0F0">ASANTE<o:p></o:p>[HIGH COURT, ACCRA]<o:p></o:p>[1992] 2 GLR 105<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">

<p class="MsoNormal" align="right" style="margin-bottom:5.0pt;text-align:right;
mso-pagination:none;border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in;mso-padding-alt:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">Date: 26 AUGUST
1991<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:<o:p></o:p>NEILS LUTTERODT FOR THE FIRST AND SECOND DEFENDANT-APPLICANTS.,<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">

ANTWI ABANKWA FOR THE PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT. <o:p></o:p>

</div>JUDGMENT OF LUTTERODT J.<o:p></o:p>The plaintiff who describes herself as the senior sister and
customary successor of the late Ernest Kwasi Asante has issued this writ
against the administrators of the late Asante for:<o:p></o:p><p class="MsoNormalCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left:.5in;mso-add-space:auto;
text-align:justify;text-indent:-.25in;mso-pagination:none;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1;
border:none;mso-padding-alt:31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt;mso-border-shadow:yes">(1)&nbsp;&nbsp; “a declaration that a building
at Abeka (house number not supplied) which has been listed among the deceased’s
estate is family property; <o:p></o:p><p class="MsoNormalCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left:.5in;mso-add-space:auto;
text-align:justify;text-indent:-.25in;mso-pagination:none;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1;
border:none;mso-padding-alt:31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt;mso-border-shadow:yes">(2)&nbsp;&nbsp; perpetual injunction; and <o:p></o:p><p class="MsoNormalCxSpMiddle" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:
5.0pt;margin-left:.5in;mso-add-space:auto;text-align:justify;text-indent:-.25in;
mso-pagination:none;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1;border:none;mso-padding-alt:31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt;
mso-border-shadow:yes">(3)&nbsp;&nbsp;
account for all rents collected by the administrators in relation
to the property.”<o:p></o:p>Shortly after being served with the writ, the first and second
defendants not only entered appearance but caused an application to be filed
under Order 25, r.4 of the High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules, 1954 (L.N. 140A)
praying for an order striking out the plaintiff’s writ and statement of claim
on the grounds that it discloses no cause of action and/or in the alternative,
that she has no locus standi to institute the instant action.<o:p></o:p>The thrust of the applicant’s counsel’s argument is that since by
relief (a) as well as on the face of her own pleadings, particularly paragraph
(14), she herself confesses that the subject matter (the unnumbered house) is
family property, then in so far as she has not at the same time on the face of
the pleadings shown either that: (a) she is the head of the family to whom this
property belongs; or (b) that the case falls under any of the exceptions spelt
out in the case of Kwan v. Nyieni [1959] G.L.R. 67 at 68, C.A. then it is very
plain that her own pleadings do not disclose a reasonable cause of action or in
the alternative, she has no locus standi to institute these present
proceedings.<o:p></o:p>One of the grounds upon which the plaintiff resists this
application is that the motion is not properly before this court. The argument
is that in applications of this kind, the proper procedure is for the
applicants first, to enter a conditional appearance to the writ of summons,
file a defence and then raise this question on the defence. Secondly, the
plaintiff contends that she is entitled either as the customary successor or a
person who is entitled to have immediate possession, since she bought the land
and supplied other building materials for the construction of the building, to
institute the present proceedings. The argument therefore is that she has the
locus standi to institute this present action.<o:p></o:p>I would first deal with the question of the procedure where a
party seeks to have his opponent’s pleadings struck out on the ground that it
discloses no reasonable cause of action or defence. Such applications may be
brought under Order 25, r. 4 of L.N. 140A in which case the court looks only at
the pleadings as they stand, and not any extrinsic evidence, e.g. affidavit
evidence. The application may also be brought under the inherent jurisdiction of
the court: see the case of Ghana Muslims Representative Council v. Salifu
[1975] 2 G.L.R. 246, C.A.<o:p></o:p>In either of these instances, I have no difficulty in coming to
the conclusion that the applicant need not enter a conditi</main>