DORIS NAADU NARTEY (PLAINTIFF/RESPONDENT) vs. CHRISTIAN KUM (DEFENDANT/APPELLANTS) [2005]DLCA7436

DORIS NAADU NARTEY (PLAINTIFF/RESPONDENT) vs. CHRISTIAN KUM (DEFENDANT/APPELLANT... [2005]DLCA7436

Date	2005-12-16
Suit No.	CIVIL APPEAL NO: H/168/2005
Citation No.	[2005]DLCA7436

OWUSU-ANSAH J.A. [PRESIDING]

OSEI J.A

R. ASAMOAH J.

MR. A. G. BOADU FOR THE DEFENDANT/APPELLANT

MR. GEORGE ESHUN FOR THE PLAINTIFF/RESPONDENT

[2005]DLCA7436
																																						<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" >DORIS NAADU NARTEY<o:p></o:p>(PLAINTIFF/RESPONDENT)<o:p></o:p><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:12.0pt;
line-height:115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,serif;mso-fareast-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;
mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;color:#00B0F0">vs.<o:p></o:p>CHRISTIAN KUM<o:p></o:p>(DEFENDANT/APPELLANTS)<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:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">

CIVIL
APPEAL NO: H/168/2005&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:
16TH DECEMBER, 2005<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:<o:p></o:p>MR.
A. G. BOADU FOR THE DEFENDANT/APPELLANT<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">

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

OWUSU-ANSAH
J.A. [PRESIDING], OSEI J.A, R. ASAMOAH J.<o:p></o:p>

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

</div>OWUSU-ANSAH, J.A.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;The crucial issue for determination in this
appeal is whether or not the learned High Court Judges Ruling is "a wrong
exercise of discretion in law”, that is apparently the main, indeed the only,
ground of appeal in this case. <o:p></o:p>The Plaintiff filed a Writ of Summons on the 18/8/1999
claiming a number of reliefs, supported by a statement of claim to which the
Defendant filed a defence emphatically denying the Plaintiff’s claim and
asserting that the property in dispute was gifted to her mother by the deceased
prior to the execution of the Will hereafter, the case suffered a checkered
career until eventually it came before Abada J, after it had been adjourned
sine die by another judge.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;It was then part
heard when the learned High Court judge became unavailable to continue with the
hearing. The next learned judge, in the fullness of his wisdom decided to hear
the case de novo rather than adopt the existing evidence which he was not
obliged to do, any way, although two witnesses had given evidence already. <o:p></o:p>The case was fixed for hearing on the 17/10/02. On that
date there was satisfactory evidence of proof of service of the relevant
hearing notice.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;However, the
defendant was absent from court, as was his counsel [without explanation] but
the plaintiff was present.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;The learned High
Court Judge decided to proceed with the hearing of the case on its merits,
rather adjourn the case again. This was perfectly within the letter and the
spirit of CI 47. This court will lend its support to any court in connection
with any reasonable action with a view to expediting a trial … <o:p></o:p>The case was accordingly heard, and judgment given on the
basis of the evidence before the court. That was on the 13th February 2003. As
at now there has been no appeal in respect of that judgment.<o:p></o:p>Be that as it may, the defendant/Respondent filed a
motion on notice to set aside the judgement of the court dated the 13th
February, 2003. <o:p></o:p>That motion was heard and dismissed by Justice Abade on
the 18th day of December, 2005 with cost of ¢1 million.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;The judge in a
brief Ruling observed "I find no merit in the instant application seeking
to set aside a judgment that was regularly obtained …………”<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;I share that view.
<o:p></o:p>It is against this Ruling that the appellant now appeals
to this court. The Notice of Appeal filed on the 11th December, 2003, stated
the only grounds of appeal as follows: <o:p></o:p>“The Rul</main>