MARY QUARCOO AND NII KOJO ARMAH II vs. MRS. VICTORIA WELBECK AND AGNES ASHONG [2015]DLSC3255

Date	2015-11-25
Suit No.	CIVIL APPEAL NO. J4/41/2012
Citation No.	[2015]DLSC3255

ANSAH JSC (PRESIDING)

ADINYIRA (MRS) JSC

ANIN YEBOAH JSC

AKOTO BAMFO (MRS) JSC

AKAMBA JSC

J. AYIKOI OTOO ESQ. FOR THE APPLICANTS/APPELLANTS/APPELLANTS.

CARL ADONGO ESQ. FOR THE RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS /RESPONDENTS.

[2015]DLSC3255
																																						<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" >MARY QUARCOO AND NII KOJO ARMAH II<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>MRS. VICTORIA WELBECK AND AGNES ASHONG<o:p></o:p>&nbsp; [SUPREME COURT,
ACCRA]<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">

CIVIL APPEAL NO. J4/41/2012&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&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: 25TH NOVEMBER, 2015<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:&nbsp;&nbsp; <o:p></o:p>J.&nbsp;
AYIKOI OTOO ESQ. FOR THE APPLICANTS/APPELLANTS/APPELLANTS.,<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">

&nbsp;CARL ADONGO ESQ. FOR THE
RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS /RESPONDENTS.<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:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">

ANSAH JSC (PRESIDING), ADINYIRA (MRS) JSC, ANIN YEBOAH JSC, AKOTO BAMFO
(MRS) JSC, AKAMBA JSC&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<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:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">

JUDGEMENT<o:p></o:p>

</div>ANSAH JSC:- <o:p></o:p>Introduction and background:<o:p></o:p>This is an appeal from the
decision of the Court of Appeal which affirmed the decision of the trial High
Court. One Joseph Nii Narh Ashong whose estate is the subject of controversy
between the parties herein died on the 27th day of July, 1989.&nbsp; A widow and nineteen children survived
him.&nbsp; The deceased was purported to have
made a will dated 14 April 1985 and thereafter, a purported codicil executed on
15 July 1989.&nbsp; In the said will and
codicil, two executors were appointed by the testator, namely Elisha Adjetey
and Victor Albert Otoo.&nbsp; They applied for
Probate but before it was granted, Elisha Adjetey died and Albert Otoo
renounced probate.&nbsp; The estate thus
remaining unadministered for a while, it became necessary for the first
applicant, Mary Quarcoo, a surviving widow of the testator and a beneficiary
under the Will as well as the head of family of the deceased to jointly apply
for Letters of Administrations with will and codicil annexed, to administer the
estate.<o:p></o:p>The
Caveat<o:p></o:p>Mrs. Victoria Welbeck and
Agnes Ashong &nbsp;caveated against the grant
for the reason&nbsp; as alleged by the
caveatrixes that the said will and the codicil read on 11 September 1998 was a
forgery and therefore not a true and original last will of the deceased for the
signature as it appears on the purported will is not similar to any of the deceased’s
specimen signatures.<o:p></o:p>Consequently, the parties
joined issues on ‘whether or not the purported Will of the said Joseph Nii Narh
Ashong dated the 14th of April 1985 and the codicil dated 15th
July 1989, were procured by the proponent by fraud and consequently null and
void’. The validity of the alleged will was thus put in issue.&nbsp; The alleged will was tendered in evidence as
Exhibit M. The trial judge having reminded himself that the case concerned a
deceased person therefore it must be looked at with great care, proceeded to
critically analyze or evaluate fully the evidence on record including the oral
evidence by the witness to the said will and codicil as well as the expert
evidence of the court witness, and eventually gave judgment for proponents.&nbsp; The caveatrice’s appeal was dismissed in
totality and she has hence, appealed to this court.<o:p></o:p>The
Appeal to the Supreme Court:<o:p></o:p>There are two Grounds of
Appeal before this court, namely;<o:p></o:p>a.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Both
the High Court and the Court of Appeal erred in law when they declared the Last
Will of Joseph Nii Narh Ashong valid.<o:p></o:p>b.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; The
judgment was against the weight of the evidence adduced at the trial.<o:p></o:p>Counsel for the appellants
argued the two grounds together by focusing on three main issues which
according to him should </main>