EMMANUEL KWAME DEBRAH vs. DANIEL AFARI LARBI [2008]DLHC7528

Date	2008-07-30
Suit No.	SUIT NO E1/35/04
Citation No.	[2008]DLHC7528

HIS LORDSHIP PETER DEI OFEI J.

[2008]DLHC7528
																																						<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" ><a name="_Hlk24368112">EMMANUEL KWAME DEBRAH<o:p></o:p></a><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>DANIEL AFARI LARBI<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"><o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>[HIGH COURT, TEMA]<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">

SUIT NO E1/35/04&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &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:
30TH JULY 2008<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 PETER DEI OFEI,
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
motion on notice for joinder of parties was filed on behalf of the
plaintiff/applicant herein praying for leave to join Joseph Okley as
Co-plaintiff and also Devtraco Company Ltd as Co-defendant to the above suit. <o:p></o:p>The
Applicant, as he is hereinafter referred to, has deposed to a supporting
affidavit stating clearly "that this application has become necessary at
this crucial stage of the suit because of the nature of the evidence, which has
cropped up at the time the Defendants called "DW1" (MR. ANNANG)"
(sic). This statement is quoted verbation from paragraph 3 of the affidavit in
support of the motion herein even though it appeared incomplete. <o:p></o:p>From
the onset therefore the applicant himself appreciated the fact that this
application was being submitted at a crucial stage of the suit without
explaining what he meant by the crucial stage, knowing very well that I have
just inherited this jacket from my predecessor. <o:p></o:p>A
cursory look at the records in the docket show that both the plaintiff and the defendant
have closed their respective cases and that the trial has ended awaiting the
delivery of judgment only. <o:p></o:p>In
respect of the application therefore two salient issues lend themselves for
consideration as follows:— <o:p></o:p>(i)&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
What purpose will this
application achieve at this crucial stage, to borrow the applicant's own words,
and <o:p></o:p>(ii)&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
(ii) Do the Rules of court
permit such application to be submitted at this belated period after both
parties have closed their cases during the trial and the parties are only
awaiting judgement thereof. <o:p></o:p>Before
resolving these two issues, I must remark that Counsel for the
defendant/respondent (hereinafter referred to as the "Respondent")
opposed the application only on points of law, the details of which will be
given later in the course of this Ruling. <o:p></o:p>In
his statement of claim, Applicant stated at paragraphs 3,7 and 8 as follows:— <o:p></o:p>"3 Sometime on or around 18th May, 2000, the
Plaintiff acquired a piece or parcel of land from GODSON OKLEY and JOSEPH OKLEY
of Nungua by a Deed of Assignment dated 18th May, 2000 between the plaintiff on
one part and the said Godson Okley and Joseph Okley on the other part stamped
as LVB 6084 A/2002 and presented same to the Lands Commission for registration.
<o:p></o:p>7, Plaintiff will say that he verified and knows that his
Assignors have valid title to the land as a result of a consent judgment in the
High Court dated 25th January 1999, in Suit No.139/6, instituted GODSON OKLEY
and JOSEPH OKLEY versus NUNGUA STOOL and others. <o:p></o:p>8 As a result of the said suit No 139/6 a Deed of
surrender dated 1st February 1999 stamped as AR 284/99, LVB 9122/99 made
between Devtraco Company Ltd on one part and the said GODSON OKLEY and JOSEPH
OKLEY on the other part, a portion of land encompassing the disputed land was
surrendered to GODSON OKLEY and JOSEPH OKLEY, [The assignor] of the plaintiff
herein." <o:p></o:p>If
I understand Applicant's affidavit in support well, Applicant appears to be
saying from paragraphs 4-11 that the evidence of DW1 seems to contradict the
evidence so far given by the applicant and that the issues raised in the
evidence of DW1 could not have been anticipated since the statement of defence
of the Defendant did not pleaded same. See paragraph 9 of the affidavit in
support. <o:p></o:p>Of
interest is paragraph 5 which admits that plaintiff's vendor has already given
evidence during the trial in favour of the title he passed on to the plaintiff.
The plaintiff's said vendor is the very person being sought to be joined as a
Co-plaintiff after the applicant himself had said at paragraph 9 of his
statement of claim that "plaintiffs says that he had a valid an</main>