CHRISTOPHER KING vs. JAMES QUAYE [2022]DLHC11625

Date	2022-01-25
Suit No.	SUIT NO. E1/109/18
Citation No.	[2022]DLHC11625

HIS LORDSHIP DR. RICHMOND OSEI-HWERE J.

PHILEMON PEARSON-PRAH ESQ FOR KWABENA KUFFOUR ESQ FOR PLAINTIFF/APPLICANT

VICTOR OWUSU ESQ FOR DEFENDANT/ RESPONDENT.

[2022]DLHC11625
																																						<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" >CHRISTOPHER KING<o:p></o:p>(PLAINTIFF/APPLICANT)<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>JAMES QUAYE<o:p></o:p>(DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT)<o:p></o:p>[HIGH COURT,
SEKONDI]<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;line-height:115%;border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0cm;mso-padding-alt:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">SUIT NO. E1/109/18&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; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;DATE:
25TH JANUARY 2022<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL<o:p></o:p>PHILEMON PEARSON-PRAH
ESQ FOR KWABENA KUFFOUR ESQ FOR PLAINTIFF/APPLICANT<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="MsoNormalCxSpMiddle" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-add-space:auto;text-align:justify;line-height:115%;tab-stops:379.15pt;
border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;padding:0cm;
mso-padding-alt:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">VICTOR OWUSU ESQ FOR DEFENDANT/
RESPONDENT.<o:p></o:p>

</div>CORAM<o:p></o:p>HIS LORDSHIP DR.
RICHMOND OSEI-HWERE J.<o:p></o:p><div style="border-top-width: 1.5pt; border-top-color: windowtext; border-left: none; border-bottom-width: 1.5pt; border-bottom-color: windowtext; border-right: none; padding: 1pt 0cm;">

<p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;
text-align:center;line-height:115%;border:none;mso-border-top-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;padding:0cm;mso-padding-alt:1.0pt 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">RULING<o:p></o:p>

</div>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; In
this application for an Order of Interlocutory Injunction, the
Plaintiff/Application (hereinafter called the Applicant) is praying the Court to
restrain the Defendant/Respondent (hereinafter called the Respondent) from
holding himself out as the landlord, from collecting rent and from harassing
any occupants of the house, the subject matter of the dispute. The application
was also seeking to compel the Respondent to deliver all chattels at the
premises which form part of the estate of late Hon. Tabitha Sybil Quaye to the
Applicant herein, who is the Administrator of the estate of the late Hon.
Quaye.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Prior
to the hearing of the application, the Respondent’s lawyer the Applicant that
he can take possession of the said chattels. Consequently, that relief has
because redundant. Thus, the application is focused on the other reliefs.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; It
is the Applicants case that the Respondent has unlawfully assumed the position
of landlord of the property in dispute and that he continues to make demands for
Rent from tenants. That he (Respondent) has failed to account for the rent
received whiles the property stands in ruins.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Respondent
is opposed to the Application. In a 25-paragraph affidavit in opposition, Respondent
states among other depositions that the property in dispute was bequeathed to
all the children of the Late Dora Quaye which includes himself and the mother
of the Applicant. That till date, the estate of the deceased has not been
distributed, shared and vested among the named beneficiaries of the Will of the
deceased and that all the named beneficiaries have the same rights in the said
property. That he is the only child and beneficiary of the estate of the
deceased currently living in the property in issue. He also states that the
surviving executrix of the Will lives in Accra and that he is the only
beneficiary who has direct oversight of the property in issue. That any action
of his in respect of the property is to safeguard the interest of the estate of
the late Dora Quaye since he is a beneficiary of the said estate. It is
Respondent’s case that grant of the application would amount to a premature
determination of the Suit since the reliefs as endorsed on the Writ are similar
to the reliefs sought in this application. &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; It
is not in doubt that Applicant is the administrator of the estate of the late
Hon. Tabitha Sybil Quaye who is a named beneficiary of the property in dispute.
It is also not in doubt that the Respondent is a named beneficiary of the
estate of the late Dora Quaye and the said estate (property) is the subject of
the Suit. Also, Respondent by his own showing has demonstrated that he is not
an executor of the Will. However, he is currently managing the property in
dispute.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; I
have carefully studied the depositions of the parties in their various
affidavits and the statement of case filed by both lawyers as well as the
reliefs sought in the substantive suit and I have come to the conclusion that
it will be prudent at this stage to appoint a Receiver and Manager to receive
rent from the portion of the property in dispute which has been or being rented
out and to manage the said portion of the property.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; From
the affidavit evidence (Exhibit CERT1) the District Court, Takoradi on 6th
September, 2018 dismissed an action initiated by the Respondent herein against
a tenant of the subject property on ground of lack of capacity. In the suit the
District Court upheld the submission that the Respondent herein is not an
executor of the estate of the late Dora Quaye to enable him act as a Landlord.
Respondent has not appealed against this ruling. The legal effect is that there
is res judicate so far as Respondent’s capacity as a Landlord is concerned. &nbsp;<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Consequently,
I order the Registrar of this Court to appoint a Receiver/Manager forthwith.
The fees of the Receiver/Manager shall be borne by the estate in issue. The
Receiver/Manager shall receive rent and manage the property till the final
determination of the suit or when the Court directs otherwise. The Receiver/Manager
shall submit his accounts to the Court every three months.<o:p></o:p>There will be no order as to costs.<o:p></o:</main>