ALFRED NII TEIKO TAGOE SUBSTITUTED BY CHRISTIAN ROBERT TAGOE vs. HENRY NII AMARTEIFIO [2013]DLCA8061

ALFRED NII TEIKO TAGOE SUBSTITUTED BY CHRISTIAN ROBERT TAGOE vs. HENRY NII AMART... [2013]DLCA8061

Date	2013-11-14
Suit No.	CIVIL SUIT NO. H1/190/09
Citation No.	[2013]DLCA8061

KUSI APPIAH JA (PRESIDING)

ADUAMA OSEI JA

SAEED K. GYAN JA.

MR. DOE AGBANU FOR PLAINTIFF/APPELLANT

MR. K. ADJEI LARTEY FOR DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT

[2013]DLCA8061
																																						<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" >ALFRED NII TEIKO TAGOE SUBSTITUTED BY CHRISTIAN ROBERT TAGOE<o:p></o:p>(PLAINTIFF/APPELLANT)<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>HENRY NII AMARTEIFIO<o:p></o:p>(DEFENDANT
/RESPONDENT)<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
SUIT NO. H1/190/09&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &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: 14TH
NOVEMBER, 2013<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:<o:p></o:p>MR.
DOE AGBANU FOR PLAINTIFF/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">

MR.
K. ADJEI LARTEY FOR 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">

KUSI
APPIAH JA (PRESIDING), ADUAMA OSEI JA, SAEED K. GYAN JA.<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>SAEED K. GYAN JA<o:p></o:p>This
is an appeal against the judgment of Anin Yeboah, J.A.(as he then was) sitting
as additional High Court Judge. The judgment was delivered on 21st
December 2004. By that judgment the trial Court rejected and, accordingly,
dismissed the challenge to the last will and Testament of Nicholas Teiko Tagoe
(deceased) who died on 12th May 2001. The will was dated 12th
October 2000 and admitted to probate by the High Court. The original Plaintiff
who identified himself as the uterine brother and customary successor of the
Testator sued the named executor, the Defendant/Respondent herein, at the High
Court for revocation of the said probate. The writ and accompanying statement
of claim had been preceded by a citation for the recall of the probate granted
to the Defendant/Respondent herein on 20/7/2001. <o:p></o:p>The
action taken by the Plaintiff was obviously based on the suspicion that the
will was fraudulent and that the Testator’s signature thereon was forged.
Additionally it was contended by the plaintiff that the Testator had become
weak and frail as a result of sickness and was blind some time before his death
and, therefore, could not have signed the document claimed to be his last Will
and Testament. Significantly, contrary to the rules and practice in pleading,
no particulars of fraud were provided in the statement of claim. The original
Plaintiff having died he was duly substituted by one Christian Robert Tagoe. <o:p></o:p>The
case went through the hands of several Judges, but it was Anin Yeboah, JA (as
he then was) who finally saw it through a full trial and gave judgment on 21st
December,2012. Oral and documentary evidence was tendered at the trial. Indeed,
the Court availed itself of two expert witnesses who examined the various
documents, including the disputed Will, presented official reports on their
respective work and subsequently mounted the witness box to be examined.
Additionally, the Plaintiff&nbsp; himself also
presented a purported technical examination report on the disputed will and
called a witness to speak to that report.<o:p></o:p>The
trial Judge having examined all the evidence and material placed before the
court during the trial concluded that the &nbsp;Plaintiff had signally failed to make a
credible case that the Will in dispute was fraudulent or that the testator’s
signature on the Will was forged. On the other hand the trial judge found the
evidence in proof of the Will in solemn form to be more credible and
consequently, admitted the Will of the late Nicholas Teiko Tagoe to probate,
thereby &nbsp;dismissing the Plaintiff’s
claim. <o:p></o:p>Being
aggrieved, the Plaintiff/Appellant herein filed a Notice of Appeal against the
judgment on 10th January 2005. Two substantive Grounds of Appeal
were set down together with the conventional indication that additional grounds
of Appeal would be filed upon receipt of the copy of the judgment. No such
additional grounds of appeal were, however filed. The appeal accordingly proceeded
to hearing on the two grounds of&nbsp; appeal
namely<o:p></o:p>a)&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
The judgment is against the
weight of the evidence.<o:p></o:p>b)&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
<s</main>