M CAPTAN CINEMA COMPANY LIMITED AND WALLACE BLANKSON (PLAINTIFFS) vs. MR. DADZIE (DEFENDANT) [2019]DLHC7655

M CAPTAN CINEMA COMPANY LIMITED AND WALLACE BLANKSON (PLAINTIFFS) vs. MR. DADZIE... [2019]DLHC7655

Date	2019-04-10
Suit No.	SUIT NO. GJ 1512/17
Citation No.	[2019]DLHC7655

HER LADYSHIP OLIVIA OBENG OWUSU J.

BEDE TUKUU FOR DEFENDANT/APPLICANT

DODZI DZIDULA WITH KELLY SERWAA KWAKYE H/B FOR WILLIAM ADDO FOR PLAINTIFFS/ RESPONDENTS

[2019]DLHC7655
																																						<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" >M CAPTAN CINEMA COMPANY LIMITED AND WALLACE BLANKSON<span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:12.0pt;
line-height:115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,serif;mso-fareast-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;
mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;color:#00B0F0"><o:p></o:p>(PLAINTIFFS)<o:p></o:p><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,serif;
mso-fareast-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;
color:#00B0F0">vs.<o:p></o:p>MR. DADZIE<o:p></o:p>(DEFENDANT)<o:p></o:p>[HIGH
COURT (GENERAL JURISDICTION COURT 4), ACCRA]<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. GJ 1512/17&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &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:
10TH APRIL, 2019<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:<o:p></o:p>BEDE TUKUU FOR DEFENDANT/APPLICANT <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">

DODZI DZIDULA WITH KELLY
SERWAA KWAKYE H/B FOR WILLIAM ADDO FOR PLAINTIFFS/ 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:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">

HER LADYSHIP OLIVIA OBENG
OWUSU, J.<o:p></o:p>

</div><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid black 1.5pt;
padding:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">

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

</div>This is
an application by the defendant/applicant for an order to set aside the entry
of judgment filed on the 3rd of September, 2018.<o:p></o:p>The
application was accompanied by a 19 – paragraph affidavit.&nbsp; In a nutshell the grounds proffered to support
the application were two:&nbsp; First that the
filing of the entry judgment on the 3rd of September, 2018 in this
Court was wrong since there is in existence a formal decree filed by the
plaintiffs/respondents in the District Court prior to the appeal filed by the
defendant/applicant.&nbsp; &nbsp;Second that the figures quoted in the entry of
judgment have been fabricated and cannot therefore be correct.<o:p></o:p>The
plaintiffs’/respondents resisted the application.&nbsp; For their part they maintained that the entry
of judgment supersedes the formal decree filed in the registry of this
Court.&nbsp; It had therefore been properly
filed in the registry of the District Court. &nbsp;It was also contended that the figures in the entry
of Judgment which had been determined by the District Court and upheld by this
Court, are accurate. &nbsp;<o:p></o:p>I shall
refer to the plaintiffs/respondents simply as the plaintiffs and the
defendant/applicant as the defendant.&nbsp; <o:p></o:p>It was
argued by learned Counsel for the defendant that the entry of Judgment filed on
the 3rd of September, 2018 is improper in law as there is in
existence a formal decree filed by the plaintiffs in the District Court prior
to the appeal filed by the defendant.&nbsp; He
submitted that since no consequential orders were made by this Court the status
quo ante prevailed and what has to be enforced is the judgment of the District
Court and not the judgment of this Court, the appellate Court.<o:p></o:p>Next it
was submitted by Defence Counsel that the figures of GH₵98, 000
quoted in the entry of judgment is not borne out by the facts.&nbsp; He contended that per the proceedings of 7th
of December, 2015 the defendant paid an amount of GH₵6, 000
at the Rent Control Department leaving a balance of GH₵5, 000
outstanding as at April, 2016.&nbsp; He thus
urged the Court to grant the application.<o:p></o:p>To these
submissions, which were urged, learned Counsel for the plaintiffs in reply
submitted that the effect of Order 51 of CI 47 is that a judgment or order of
the High Court in an appeal from a District Court may be enforced by the High
Court unless the High Court directs in the said judgment or order that same is
enforced by the District Court.&nbsp; &nbsp;According to Counsel this Court in its
judgment of 13th of July, 2018 did not direct that the judgment should
be enforced in the District Court.&nbsp;
Consequently on the basis of Order 51 the said judgment may be enforced
by the High court. <o:p></o:p>