EMMANUEL ADJEI ABLORH & 4 ORS. (PLAINTIFFS) vs. AKPORFIO MENSAH KOFI (DECD.) AND ADJEI AKPOR (DEFENDANTS) [2005]DLHC7521

EMMANUEL ADJEI ABLORH & 4 ORS. (PLAINTIFFS) vs. AKPORFIO MENSAH KOFI (DECD.) AND... [2005]DLHC7521

Date	2005-02-18
Suit No.	NO: L.538/97
Citation No.	[2005]DLHC7521

HIS LORDSHIP E.F. DZAKPASU J.

L.S.N. AKUETTEY ESQ. FOR THE PLAINTIFF/APPLICANTS.

G.S. BABANAWO ESQ. FOR THE DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT.

[2005]DLHC7521
																																						<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" >EMMANUEL ADJEI ABLORH
&amp; 4 ORS.<o:p></o:p>(PLAINTIFFS)<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>AKPORFIO MENSAH KOFI (DECD.) AND ADJEI AKPOR<o:p></o:p>(DEFENDANTS)<o:p></o:p>[HIGH
COURT, 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">

NO:
L.538/97&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;DATE: 18TH FEBRUARY,
2005<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:<o:p></o:p>L.S.N. AKUETTEY ESQ., FOR
THE PLAINTIFF/APPLICANTS. <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">

G.S.
BABANAWO ESQ., FOR THE DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT. <o:p></o:p>

</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">

HIS
LORDSHIP E.F. DZAKPASU J.<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:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">

</div>This
is an application for leave to attach the Defendants/Respondents for contempt
under S.44 of LN. 140. As could be gleaned from the endorsement on the Writ of
Summons and the averments in the statements of Claim and of Defence and
Counter-Claim, the plaintiffs/Applicants and the Defendants/Respondents are
litigating over the administration of what appears to be family lands of mutual
interest and monies and/or profits that have accrued therefrom and allegedly
appropriated by one party or the other. At the heels of the Writ of Summons was
an application ex-parte by the Plaintiffs/Applicants for an order of restraint
against the Defendant/Respondent from interfering with the land the subject
matter of the Suit until the final determination of the Suit and for any other
order as to the Court may seem just. The Court granted the motion and
restrained the Defendant/Respondent (i.e. the Respondents) for 30 days with the
option to re-apply on notice. The application was subsequently repeated on
notice and the resulting injunctive order was given until the final
determination of the suit. <o:p></o:p>On
the 4th July, 2002, the plaintiff/Applicants (i.e. the Applicants) filed the
instant Motion on Notice for Leave to attach the Respondents—<o:p></o:p>Akporfio
Mensah Kofi; Adjei Akporfio and Annum Akpor- for contempt. The affidavit in
support deposed inter alia, as follows:— <o:p></o:p>"3. That on 5/11/97
this Honourable Court granted an Ex-Parte interim injunction restraining the
Defendant, his servants, agents, assignees, etc from interfering with the land
the subject — matter of the dispute for a period of 30 days after which the
application should be brought on not ice (Exhibit "A"). <o:p></o:p>4. That the Order was duly
brought to the notice of the Defendant. <o:p></o:p>5. That on 9/12/97 the
Plaintiffs herein repeated their application on notice and after hearing the
parties this Honourable Court extended the said interim injunction until the
final determination of this suit (Exhibit "B"). <o:p></o:p>6. That in arrogant defiance
of this Honourable Court Order, the Defendant and his son and Nephew have
rather intensified the alienation of the said lands and are encouraging; their
grantees to hurriedly develop Same (Exhibit ("C"). <o:p></o:p>7. That in an attempt to
regularies the unlawful alienations the Defendant in flagrant violation of this
Honourable Court s Orders has even gone ahead to apply for registration of the
said land and same was published at page 24 of the Daily Graphic of Tuesday,
April, 30, 2002 (Exhibit "D"). <o:p></o:p>8. That the Contemnors for
all intents and purposes have shown gross disrespect to this Honourable Court
and would continue to do so unless committed to Prison". <o:p></o:p>As
the Court notes have intimated, this Motion suffered several adjournments, on
28/4/03, the Court noted that no affidavit in opposition was on record as Mr.
Tagoe, then Counsel for the Respondents had claimed to have filed. The matter
was therefore adjourned to 21/5/03 to receive the affidavit in opposition. The
Respondents appointed additional Solicitors — Messrs. BINAWOTSOR AND ASSOCIATES
on 12/11/03 and with a letter from that firm requesting an adjournment to
18/11/01- Or 27/11/03. <o:p></o:p>Regretably,
the 3rd Respondent failed to attend the sitting on 18/11/03 which failure
compelled the Court to issue a Bench Warrant for his arrest. The Respondents
appointed Mr. G.S. Babanawo as their new Solicitor on 19/3/2004. It took up to
the 1st November, 2004 to arrest the 3rd Respondent and surrender him to the
Court. His Counsel, Mr. Babanawo was at hand to pray for bail for him on the same
day. He was admitted to bail. It is important to put on record that the focus
has shifted to two Respondents because the 1st Respondent Akporfio Mensah Kofi
was reported as very old and ailing and that the contumacious acts alleged were
actually committed by the two Respondents with the consent and concurrence of
the 1st Respondent who lost his life on 5th April, 2004. After three
adjournments from the 1/11/04, Learned Counsel for the Respondents informed
this Court on the 26/01/05 that they found it unnecessary to contest the motion
for attachment for contempt as the Respondents had conceded liability on legal
advise. Counsel therefore pleaded with the Court to deal leniently with the
Respondents who acted literarily in ignorance. <o:p></o:p>

Whilst
expressing appreciation for the bold stand belatedly though taken by his
Learned friend, Counsel for the Applicants impressed upon tae Court to deal
strictly with the Respondents in order to deter people of the like mindedness
of the Contemanor</main>