DAASEBRE NANA OSEI BONSU II @ ST. OSWALD GYIMA KESSIE vs. AKWASI MENSAH & 3 ORS [2005]DLCA6699

Date	2005-06-21
Suit No.	CIVIL APPEAL NO. H3/472/05
Citation No.	[2005]DLCA6699

J.B. AKAMBA JA [PRESIDING]

JONES DOTSE JA

R.K. APALOO JA

KWAKU PAINTSIL FOR APPLICANTS.

KWASI AFRIFA FOR RESPONDENT

[2005]DLCA6699
																																						<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" >DAASEBRE NANA OSEI BONSU
II @ ST. OSWALD GYIMA KESSIE<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>AKWASI MENSAH &amp; 3
ORS<o:p></o:p>[COURT
OF APPEAL, ACCRA]<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">

CIVIL APPEAL NO. H3/472/05&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: 21ST JUNE, 2005<o:p></o:p>

KWASI
AFRIFA FOR RESPONDENT.<o:p></o:p>

<p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="text-align:center;line-height:115%;
border:none;mso-border-top-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;mso-border-bottom-alt:
solid windowtext 1.5pt;padding:0in;mso-padding-alt:1.0pt 0in 1.0pt 0in">RULING<o:p></o:p>

</div>DOTSE, JA<o:p></o:p>By
a notice of motion filed on 8-6-05, the Defendants/Applicants, hereinafter
referred to as Applicants, seek an extension of time pursuant to Rule 20(4) of
the Court of Appeal Rules, 1997, C.I. 19 as amended by C.I.21 to enable them
file their written submission of case in answer to the Plaintiff/Respondents,
hereinafter referred to as Respondent's written submission of case. <o:p></o:p>The
basis of the Applicants instant application has its genesis in a Ruling
delivered by this court on 26-5-05, Civil Motion No. H1/131/05.&nbsp; By that Ruling, this court held that the
notice of intention to rely on preliminary objection filed by the applicants
was premature and accordingly dismissed same. <o:p></o:p>By
ordinary computation of time, and this has been so held in the Ruling of
26-05-05, the time available for the Applicants to have filed their written
statement of ease lapsed on 7-03-05.&nbsp; However,
before the expiry of that date, the Applicants on 2-305 filed the notice of
intention to rely on preliminary legal objection which was dismissed by this
court on 26-5-05. <o:p></o:p>The
instant application has been premised on the fact that the delay of the applicants
in filing their written submissions within time was not willful and
deliberate.&nbsp; From the processes filed in
this court towards the prosecution of the instant application and also from the
erudite submission of both counsel, the following undisputed facts can be
made:— <o:p></o:p>(i)&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
That the Applicants herein had previously
filed a Notice of intention to rely on a preliminary legal objection. <o:p></o:p>(ii)&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
An objection was raised by learned counsel
for the Respondent herein to the propriety of the Notice of intention to rely
on preliminary objection at that time. <o:p></o:p>(iii)&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
This court accordingly delivered a Ruling
on 26-5-05 upholding the fact that the Notice to rely on preliminary objection
was not proper and same was dismissed. <o:p></o:p>(iv)&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
As at 26-5-05 when the Ruling was
delivered, time for the Appellants herein, as Respondents in the Appeal to file
their written submission of case had lapsed on 7-3-05. <o:p></o:p>(v)&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
The Applicants accordingly on 8-6-05 filed
the instant application for leave for extension of time to enable them file the
written submission of case in answer to the Plaintiff/Appellant/Respondent
submission. <o:p></o:p>(vi)&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;