IN RE KUKEBAH (DECD); THE COMMISSIONER, CHRAJ AND ANOTHER vs. ASUMINA AND OTHERS [2002]DLHC1196

Date	2002-05-21
Suit No.
Citation No.	[2002]DLHC1196

QUAYE J

ROBERT TATER FOR THE APPLICANTS.

NO APPEARANCE FOR THE RESPONDENTS.

[2002]DLHC1196
																																						<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">IN RE KUKEBAH (DECD); THE COMMISSIONER, CHRAJ AND ANOTHER<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">ASUMINA AND OTHERS<o:p></o:p>[HIGH
COURT, BOLGATANGA]<o:p></o:p>[2001-2002]
1 GLR 515<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">

</div>COUNSEL:<o:p></o:p>ROBERT
TATER FOR THE 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">

NO
APPEARANCE FOR THE RESPONDENTS. <o:p></o:p>

</div>JUDGEMENT<o:p></o:p>Quaye J. <o:p></o:p>The
deceased, Kukebah Charles Baba, died intestate at the Navrongo War Memorial
Hospital on 30 November 1998. During his active life, and presumably until his
death, Kukebah Charles Baba worked as a teacher under the employment of the
Ghana Education Service. Upon his death, a joint application for grant of
letters of administration of his estate was filed and successfully pursued in
the Circuit Court, Bolgatanga by his wife and daughter respectively. The second
applicant is the said surviving widow of the deceased. On the face of it, the
application for the grant of letters of administration was filed in the circuit
court. However, for reasons yet to unfold, the grant was made by the High
Court. I will come back to consider the application for the grant of letters of
administration later in this ruling.<o:p></o:p>Armed
with the grant of the letters of administration, which was obtained on 15 March
1999, the widow, the second applicant, made an application to the district
manager of the Social Security and National Insurance Trust (SSNIT), the third
respondents, for a share in the lump sum benefit of her husband. When this
application was refused, the widow next approached the office of the first
applicant, the Commission on Human Rights and Administrative Justice to help
ventilate her claim. The above provides the genesis of the instant application
which was filed in this court on 14 December 2001. In the format of this ruling
I feel bound to reproduce excerpts from the affidavits that were filed in
support of the application. With respect to the affidavit of the first
applicant, only two paragraphs thereof will be reproduced. They are:<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">“(4)
That I am advised by counsel and believe same to be true that the refusal of
the officials of SSNIT to vary the nominations to include the second applicant
and the two children of the deceased is unjust, unfair and a violation of their
rights under the Constitution, 1992 as spouse and children, respectively of the
late Charles Kukebah (deceased) ... <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">(6)
That I am advised by counsel and believe same to be true that this is an
appropriate case to apply for a variation of the nominee/beneficiaries of the
SSNIT pension contributions of Charles Kukebah (Deceased).”<o:p></o:p>On
her part the second applicant, inter alia, made the following depositions:<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">“(4)
That my late husband was a contributor to the SSNIT Pension Fund with social
security identity No 001670876. <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">(7)
That my late husband is also survived by two children of a first (divorced)
wife</main>