KOFI VINYO AND CO. LTD (DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT) vs. K.N.U.S.T, KUMASI (PLAINTIFF/APPLICANT/APPELLANT) [2011]DLCA7925

KOFI VINYO AND CO. LTD (DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT) vs. K.N.U.S.T, KUMASI (... [2011]DLCA7925

Date	2011-06-24
Suit No.	CIVIL APPEAL SUIT NO: H1/32/2011
Citation No.	[2011]DLCA7925

MARIAMA OWUSU J.A. (PRESIDING)

FRANCIS KORBIEH J.A.

IRENE CHARITY DANQUAH J.A.

[2011]DLCA7925
																																						<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" >KOFI VINYO AND
CO. LTD<o:p></o:p>(DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT)<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>K.N.U.S.T, KUMASI<o:p></o:p>(PLAINTIFF/APPLICANT/APPELLANT)<o:p></o:p>[COURT OF APPEAL, KUMASI]<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 SUIT NO:&nbsp; H1/32/2011&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &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: 24TH JUNE, 2011<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">

MARIAMA
OWUSU J.A. (PRESIDING), FRANCIS KORBIEH J.A., IRENE CHARITY DANQUAH J.A.<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">

<p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;
text-align:center;border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0cm;mso-padding-alt:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">JUDGMENT<o:p></o:p>

</div>MARIAMA OWUSU, J.A.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>On the 23-8-2010, the Circuit Court, Sunyani ruled as
follows:<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>“To preserve the status quo
ante which allowed the <o:p></o:p>Defendant to process its
timber at the Plaintiff’s <o:p></o:p>premises for export, the
court will refuse the application<o:p></o:p>for Interim Injunction and
urged the parties to co-operate <o:p></o:p>with the court to
expeditiously deal with the substantive <o:p></o:p>case.&nbsp; Plaintiff’s application on motion for Interim
Injunction<o:p></o:p>is thus refused.&nbsp; There will be cost of GH¢250.00 awarded <o:p></o:p>against the
Plaintiff/Applicant”.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>Dissatisfied with the said ruling, the
Plaintiff/Applicant/Appellant filed the instant Appeal.<o:p></o:p>The Grounds of Appeal are as follows:<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p><p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst" style="margin-top:0cm;margin-right:0cm;
margin-bottom:0cm;margin-left:21.3pt;margin-bottom:.0001pt;mso-add-space:auto;
text-align:justify;text-indent:-21.3pt;mso-list:l1 level1 lfo1">1.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
That
the ruling is against the weight of evidence presented before the Learned Trial
Judge.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p><p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-top:0cm;margin-right:0cm;
margin-bottom:0cm;margin-left:21.3pt;margin-bottom:.0001pt;mso-add-space:auto;
text-align:justify;text-indent:-21.3pt;mso-list:l1 level1 lfo1">2.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
The
Learned Trial Judge wrongly exercised his discretion in favour of the Defendant
by refusing the
application for Interlocutory Injunction.<o:p></o:p>