GEOFFREY CHRISTOPHER BADU-ANUM vs. MRS. HENRIETTA BADU-ANUM [1999]DLSC6408

Date	1999-07-14
Suit No.	CIVIL APPEAL NO. 5/97
Citation No.	[1999]DLSC6408

HAYFRON-BENJAMIN J.S.C.

AMPIAH J.S.C.

ADJABENG J.S.C.

ATUGUBA J.S.C.

AKUFFO J.S.C.

ADUMUA-BOSSMAN FOR APPELLANT.

FUI TSIKATA WITH MIKE DZAKU FOR RESPONDENT

[1999]DLSC6408
																																						<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" >GEOFFREY CHRISTOPHER BADU-ANUM <o:p></o:p>(PLAINTIFF/RESPONDENT/APPELLANT)<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>MRS. HENRIETTA BADU-ANUM <o:p></o:p>(DEFENDANT/APPELLANT/RESPONDENT.)<o:p></o:p>[SUPREME
COURT, ACCRA]<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</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="center" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;
text-align:center;line-height:115%;border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in;mso-padding-alt:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">CIVIL
APPEAL NO. 5/97&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;&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;DATE: 14TH JULY, 1999<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:<o:p></o:p>ADUMUA-BOSSMAN FOR APPELLANT. <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">

FUI TSIKATA WITH MIKE DZAKU FOR
RESPONDENT.<o:p></o:p>

</div>CORAM:&nbsp;&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">

HAYFRON-BENJAMIN J.S.C., AMPIAH
J.S.C., ADJABENG J.S.C., ATUGUBA J.S.C., AKUFFO J.S.C.<o:p></o:p>

</div><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">

JUDGMENT<o:p></o:p>

</div>C.
HAYFRON-BENJAMIN, J.S.C. <o:p></o:p>In
this appeal the Respondent shall be known as the Plaintiff and the Appellant,
the Defendant. In the appeal before us the Defendant attacks the judgment of
the Court of Appeal as rendered by the majority of their Lordships, invites us
to uphold the opinion of the minority and prays for <o:p></o:p>"the
reversal of the Appeal Court decision and the construction of the Deed to
reflect a rectification in accordance with clause 3 thereof with costs in
favour of Defendant/Appellant.” <o:p></o:p>The
Plaintiff commenced these proceedings by an Originating Summons wherein he
claimed <o:p></o:p>“to
be (b) interested as a party thereto in the time construction of a document
dated 29th July, 1993 entitled “Deed of Gift” for the determination of the
following question: (c) whether or not a certain document entitled “Deed of
Gift” dated the 29th July, 1993 and executed by Plaintiff and Defendant confers
any title or interest whatsoever on Defendant or on any of her five children by
Plaintiff to or in the land and premises above-mentioned or any part thereof
numbered 270/6 BLK. E3, North Teshie, Accra . . . .” <o:p></o:p>It
is difficult to appreciate what “interest” the Plaintiff was claiming by that
question. If I understand the question the Plaintiff was requesting the Court
to determine the interest the Defendant had in the property. Nor were the
Plaintiff’s five children by the Defendant parties to the originating summons.
How they were to be bound by any decision of the Court the Plaintiff did not so
indicate. But he accompanied his originating summons with an affidavit in which
he averred that the alleged Deed of Gift was prepared on the instructions of
the Defendant and he (Plaintiff) signed the document at her request: That he
did not have independent legal advice but dealt which the Solicitor instructed
by the Defendant: That the “Deed of Gift” did not contain any "operative
words of grant" and no “habendum clause”: That paragraph 3 of the Exhibit
G.C.B.A.1 was completely false and wholly untrue. In an unusual conclusion to
any affidavit in support of an originating summons the Plaintiff prayed for <o:p></o:p>“
. . . . a true construction of the said Deed Exhibit G.B.D.A.1 and for an
answer to the question whether or not it confers any title, right, interest or
claim whatsoever to the land therein mentioned to; in or upon Defendant or any
of her five children by me therein mentioned.” <o:p></o:p>It
will be useful at this stage to set down the paragraph 3 of the Exhibit
referred to above. It runs thus <o:p></o:p>“That
the “DONEES” have performed the necessary customary rites to wit: payment of
two Bottles Schnapps and the sum of ¢25,000.00 (twenty-five thousand cedis) to
the “DONOR” in the presence of all principal members of the “DONOR'S” family.” <o:p></o:p>On
the 12th October, 1995 even before the Defendant had submitted an affidavit in
opposition, three persons one claiming to be “the current head of family” and
an elder brother and elder sister of the Plaintiff had sworn jointly to an
affidavit to the effect that “we are principal members and elders of the family
of the Plaintiff in this suit, Mr. Geoffrey C. Badu-Anum, alleged donor in the
Deed dated 29th July, 1993 and husband of the Defendant Henrietta Badu-Anum.”
(emphasis mine) To all intents and purposes at least two of the three
subscribers to the affidavit were illiterates. The main thrust of the
affidavit, however, was that the statement in Exhibit “G.C.B.A.1” concerning
them was false. In their own words <o:p></o:p>“we
are not aware, and have never been informed, of any gift made by the Plaintiff
to the Defendant.” <o:p></o:p>The
most important thing at this stage was that by their affidavit they recognized
that the Plaintiff and the Defendant were lawfully married — husband and wife. <o:p></o:p>By
her affidavit dated the 23rd October, 1995 the Defendant averred that <o:p></o:p>“
. . . . the originating summons should be struck out in limine as misconceived,</main>