ADWOA OWUSUWAA vs. NANA ADU AMEYAW, THE EFFIDUASE STOOL, CHRISTIAN COUNCIL AND YAW [2016]DLHC5568

ADWOA OWUSUWAA vs. NANA ADU AMEYAW, THE EFFIDUASE STOOL, CHRISTIAN COUNCIL AND... [2016]DLHC5568

Date	2016-11-23
Suit No.	SUIT NO: C5/12/16
Citation No.	[2016]DLHC5568

JUSTICE FRANCIS OBIRI

NYAMAH POKU FOR PLAINTIFF/RESPONDENT

GABRIEL KODZI FOR 1ST AND 2ND DEFENDANTS/APPLICANTS

[2016]DLHC5568
																																						<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" >ADWOA OWUSUWAA<o:p></o:p>(PLAINTIFF/RESPONDENT)<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>NANA ADU AMEYAW, THE EFFIDUASE STOOL, CHRISTIAN COUNCIL AND YAW<o:p></o:p>(DEFENDANTS/ APPLICANTS)<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:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">

SUIT NO: C5/12/16&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &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: 23RD NOVEMBER, 2016<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:&nbsp;&nbsp;&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>NYAMAH POKU FOR
PLAINTIFF/RESPONDENT<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">

GABRIEL
KODZI FOR 1ST AND 2ND DEFENDANTS/APPLICANTS<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">

</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">

RULING<o:p></o:p>

</div>On 23-06-2016,
the defendants/applicants hereinafter called the applicants filed a motion on
notice for review of a decision of this Court dated 14th June 2016.&nbsp; The said decision was given by this Court
differently constituted and presided over by his Lordship Justice Paul
Richardson who is now on retirement.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The motion filed
on 14th June 2016 was in respect of the court refusal to set aside an order of
interim injunction it granted against the applicants, their agents, servants,
assigns, privies etc and any other person whatsoever called from in any way
trespassing, alienating, disposing of, or granting any interest, right or title
or dealing with the land in dispute in anyway until the final determination of
the case.&nbsp; The injunction order was made
on 15th March 2016.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>When the motion
for review by the applicants came up for hearing on 16th November 2016,
before me, Counsel for the plaintiff/respondent hereinafter called the
respondent raised a preliminary objection on point of law in respect of the
competency of the motion for review by the applicant in this case.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Counsel raised two main grounds in
his submission.&nbsp; He contended as follows:<o:p></o:p>(a)&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; That this Court has no jurisdiction to
review its decision in anyway.&nbsp; <o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>