FRANK OTCHERE BAIDOO vs. SAMUEL ABOAGYE & OTHERS [2014]DLHC8494

Date	2014-05-16
Suit No.	SUIT NO. CI/44/13
Citation No.	[2014]DLHC8494

HIS LORDSHIP JUSTICE JACOB B. BOON

ASANTE KROBEA FOR PLAINTIFF

KWASI AFRIFA WITH AMA ASENSO FOR THE DEFENDANT

[2014]DLHC8494
																																						<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" >FRANK OTCHERE
BAIDOO<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>SAMUEL ABOAGYE &amp; OTHERS<o:p></o:p>[HIGH
COURT, 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">

SUIT
NO. CI/44/13&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &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:
16TH MAY, 2014<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:<o:p></o:p>ASANTE
KROBEA FOR PLAINTIFF <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">

KWASI
AFRIFA WITH AMA ASENSO FOR THE DEFENDANT&nbsp;
<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">

<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-indent:
0cm;line-height:115%;border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0cm;mso-padding-alt:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">HIS
LORDSHIP JUSTICE JACOB B. BOON<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;line-height:115%;border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0cm;mso-padding-alt:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">RULING<o:p></o:p>

</div>The plaintiff caused to be issued from the Registry of this
court a writ of summons against the defendants claiming (a) declaration of
title to and recovery of possession of a parcel of land located at Adiebeba,
Kumasi, (b) general damages for trespass (c) an order to demolish or pull down
all structures erected on the property by, or at the behest of the defendants
and, (d) an order of perpetual injunction against the defendants from
interfering with plaintiff’s possession of the land. The writ was issued on
behalf of the plaintiff by Obeng Manu Law Firm, Sarpomaa Chambers. Though the
official stamp of the firm appears on both the writ and the accompanying
statement of claim, there was no handwritten signature on either of them. However,
they were accepted and sealed by the Registry and served on the defendants. The
defendants engaged the services of lawyer Ohene Amankwa - Gyang of Kofi Addo
&amp; Associates and he filed appearance, as well as, a statement of defence,
including a counterclaim on their behalf. The plaintiff was later granted an
interlocutory injunction against the defendants. <o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>Meanwhile,
both sides changed the original lawyers. It was the current lawyer for the
plaintiff who filed application for directions and when it came for hearing,
the court sought the opinion of the lawyers on the status of the writ of
summons as no hand-written signature appears on it except the official stamp of
the lawyer for the plaintiff. This is in the light of the provisions of Order 2
rule 7(2) of the High Court (Civil Procedure Rules) 2004, C.I. 47 in the
following terms: <o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>“No writ shall be
sealed unless at the time it is filed for sealing, the person filing it leaves
with the Registrar a copy signed by the plaintiff if the plaintiff sues in
person or by, or on behalf of the plaintiff’s lawyer”.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>When
the court raised the matter as earlier stated, the solicitor for the defendants
promptly submitted that the writ was void as being unsigned and prayed it
should be struck out notwithstanding that the defendants, through their
original lawyer, fully aware of the state of the writ, entered appearance and
filed a statement of defence which included a counterclaim. Defendants also
fiercely resisted the application for interlocutory injunction for reasons
unrelated to the status of the writ of summons but the opposition did not find
favour with my brother, Batu J, who allowed the application for the plaintiff.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>In response, counsel for the plaintiff contended that the
official stamp of the law firm which issued the writ was on it. He contended
that if that impression cannot be regarded as a signature, then the error be treated
as a mere technicality which should be conveniently dealt with under Order 81
of C.I. 47. In other words, if the writ was not signed, the failure to do so,
in his opinion, is not a fundamental error so as to affect its validity.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>Counsel for the defendants relied on a number of decided
cases in her contention that the writ is a nullity. Notable amongst them are
Republic v High Court, Tema; Ex parte Owners of MV Essco Spirit (Darya Shipping
SA Interested party) (2003-2004) SCGLR 689 and Awuni v West African
</main>