VICTOR ODIKO NORTEI, APROTECH HOUSING SCHEME LTD, DR. KOFI SAM vs. THE STATE HOUSING CO. LTD & 61 ORS AND THE REPUBLIC vs. KWABENA KINGDOM EXPARTE: VICTOR ODIKO NORTEI [2013]DLHC12064

VICTOR ODIKO NORTEI, APROTECH HOUSING SCHEME LTD, DR. KOFI SAM vs. THE STATE HOU... [2013]DLHC12064

Date	2013-04-18
Suit No.	SUIT NO. E1/03/2010
Citation No.	[2013]DLHC12064

HIS LORDSHIP JUSTICE JOHN AJET-NASAM

PLAINTIFF – PRESENT

RESPONDENT – PRESENT

JAMES ABIADUKA FOR CONTEMPTOR

[2013]DLHC12064
																																						<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" >VICTOR
ODIKO NORTEI, APROTECH HOUSING SCHEME LTD, DR. KOFI SAM<o:p></o:p>(PLAINTIFFS)<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>THE
STATE HOUSING CO. LTD &amp; 61 ORS<o:p></o:p>AND<o:p></o:p>THE
REPUBLIC vs. KWABENA KINGDOM<o:p></o:p>EXPARTE:
VICTOR ODIKO NORTEI<o:p></o:p>(DEFENDANTS)<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;[HIGH COURT, ACCRA]<o:p></o:p><div style="border-top: none; border-right: none; border-left: none; border-image: initial; border-bottom-width: 1.5pt; border-bottom-color: windowtext; padding: 0cm 0cm 1pt;">

<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:
justify;line-height:normal;border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0cm;mso-padding-alt:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">SUIT NO.
E1/03/2010&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &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&nbsp;&nbsp;APRIL 2013<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL<o:p></o:p>PLAINTIFF – PRESENT,<o:p></o:p>RESPONDENT – PRESENT,<o:p></o:p><div style="border-top: none; border-right: none; border-left: none; border-image: initial; border-bottom-width: 1.5pt; border-bottom-color: windowtext; padding: 0cm 0cm 1pt;">

</div>CORAM<o:p></o:p>HIS LORDSHIP JUSTICE JOHN AJET-NASAM<o:p></o:p><div style="border-top-width: 1.5pt; border-top-color: windowtext; border-left: none; border-bottom-width: 1.5pt; border-bottom-color: windowtext; border-right: none; padding: 1pt 0cm;">

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

</div>In this application which is quasi criminal, the sanction
means imprisonment or otherwise, the onus is really on the applicant to prove
the contempt action of the respondent. I have listened and read the affidavit
attached and exhibits. I am of the considered opinion that, the contempt had
not been proved against the respondent.&nbsp;
He genuinely occupied the land leased to him by SHC and had judgment
against the applicant. This had not been appealed against. He has undergone the
procedure for possession in the Court. The application therefore fails.<o:p></o:p>

&nbsp;</main>