NII SACKEY AKUMEA I vs. NUMO SETH AYERKAI OKAINE & 4 ORS. [2019]DLHC10315

Date	2019-11-11
Suit No.	SUIT NO. LD/0001/18
Citation No.	[2019]DLHC10315

HER LADYSHIP JUSTICE ANANDA J. AIKINS (MRS).

NII ACQUAYE BRUCE THOMPSON COUNSEL FOR THE 2ND TO 4TH DEFENDANTS/APPLICANTS PRESENT

STEVE GREY COUNSEL FOR THE 5TH DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT PRESENT

[2019]DLHC10315
																																						<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" >NII
SACKEY AKUMEA I<o:p></o:p>(PLAINTIFF)<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>NUMO
SETH AYERKAI OKAINE &amp; 4 ORS.<o:p></o:p>(DEFENDANTS)<o:p></o:p>[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" align="center" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;
text-align:center;mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:none;text-autospace:
none;border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;padding:0cm;
mso-padding-alt:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">SUIT NO. LD/0001/18&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &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:
11TH NOVEMBER 2019<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:<o:p></o:p>NII ACQUAYE BRUCE
THOMPSON, COUNSEL FOR THE 2ND TO 4TH
DEFENDANTS/APPLICANTS 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;">

STEVE
GREY, COUNSEL FOR THE 5TH DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT PRESENT<o:p></o:p>

HER LADYSHIP JUSTICE ANANDA J. AIKINS
(MRS).<o:p></o:p>

</div>&nbsp;MOTION ON NOTICE TO STRIKE OUT THE NAME
OF THE 5TH DEFENDANT FROM THE SUIT<o:p></o:p>RULING<o:p></o:p>This application is a request by the 2nd,
3rd and 4th defendants for an order of the Court striking
out the name of the 5th defendant from the substantive action. The
reason for this request is that the 2nd, 3rd and 4th
defendants claim that the Supreme Court has confirmed the judgment of the High
Court that four composite families namely Sawerpramano, Juaben, Amanfo and Kubeshishi
are the owners of Danchira lands as against the 5th defendant’s
Djan-Bi Amoo family. The applicants say that the 5th defendant has
no land at Danchira and therefore his name ought to be struck out of the
substantive suit.<o:p></o:p>The record of proceedings show that the
plaintiff originally issued his writ and statement of claim against the 1st
to 4th defendants on the 4th of January, 2018. Thereafter
on the 29th of March 2018, the 5th defendant as head of
the Djan-Bi Amu family applied to be joined to the suit, which application was
granted by the Court on 25th April, 2018. The writ and statement of
claim was thereafter amended to include the name of the 5th
defendant who subsequently entered appearance and filed a statement of defence
and counterclaim on 14th June, 2018.<o:p></o:p>On the 18th of June, 2018,
the Counsel for the 2nd, 3rd and 4th
defendants filed an application for an order to strike out the name of the 5th
defendant from the substantive action on the ground that the 5th
defendant is not an owner of Danchira land which is the subject matter of the
substantive case and that per the judgment of the Supreme Court which affirmed
the judgment of the High Court, the 5th defendant has no land at
Danchira to litigate over and therefore the joinder of the 5th
defendant to the substantive action was not supported by any rule of law or
procedure.<o:p></o:p>The said application by the 2nd
to 4th defendants was struck out by the Court on 29th
August, 2018 for want of prosecution. However, same was relisted before the
Court on 20th May, 2019 and subsequently moved by Counsel for the 2nd,
3rd and 4th defendants on the 4th of July,
2019 and this ruling is in respect of the request of the 2nd, 3rd
and 4th defendants for an order to strike out the name of the 5th
defendant from the substantive matter. <o:p></o:p>As already noted above, the reason of
the 2nd, 3rd and 4th defendants for this
request is that the four composite families namely Sawerpramano, Juaben, Amanfo
and Kubeshishi have been adjudged as owners of the Danchira lands as against
the 5th defendant’s Djan-bi Amoo family and that the said Djan-bi
Amoo family has no land at Danchira to litigate over. The 2nd, 3rd
and 4th defendants/applicants referred the Court to the judgments of
the High Court, the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court which have made it
clear that Danchira lands are owned by the four composite families as mentioned
above.<o:p></o:p>The applicants exhibited the said
judgments to the application as Exhibits A, B and C. Exhibit A is the High
Court judgment delivered on 1st February, 2010, Exhibit B is the
Supreme Court judgment dated 13th April, 2016 and Exhibit C is the
Court of Appeal judgment dated 27th March, 2019.<o:p></o:p>The 5th defendant is opposed
to the present application on the ground that the issue of title to Danchira</main>