Try asking the following...
RULING
The Plaintiff commenced the instant action against the Defendant for the following reliefs:
1. An order to compel 1st and 2nd Defendants to direct the 3rd Defendant to remove an erected facility that blocks the view of the Plaintiff’s shop which breaks an agreement between the Plaintiff and 1st and 2nd Defendants
2. General damages of GH¢5,000.00 against the Defendants from breaching paragraphs 1.4 and 2.4 of the settlement agreement between the 1st and 2nd Defendants and the Plaintiff.
3. Costs of litigation.
Counsel for and on behalf of the Defendants made an oral submission in terms of objection and for rejection of evidence attached to the Plaintiff’s Witness Statements on the following grounds:
1. That the deed of agreement marked as Exhibit ‘D’ was not stamped.
2. That the stamped deed of agreement was filed after the objection had been raised.
3. That the deed of agreement filed on 16/9/2022 is a photocopy and not the original.
4. That the Plaintiff must produce the original for authentication.
5. That the deed of agreement filed on 16/9/2022 was not signed by the 1st and 2nd Defendants and that all the signatures on same were scanned from another document.
6. That the author(s) of the agreement filed on 16/9/2022 are not known.
7. That the parties in the deed of agreement filed on 16/9/2022 are illiterates and there was no jurat as such it fails to comply with the provisions in the illiterate protection Act.
8. That the attached photographs (Exhibit 2) have no indication of the date they were taken and the person who took them for the purpose of cross examination on same.
In the written submission of counsel for and on behalf of the Plaintiff/Respondent she stated the following:
1. That if the Judge notices an omission of a stamp on an instrument he/she can order the stamping to be done in accordance with the provisions in section 32 (2) of the Stamp Duty Act, 2005 (Act 689) in which payment of the penalty payable would be made to the appropriate authority to pave way for the instrument or document in issue to be admitted in evidence.
This provision was supported with the principles adduced in the case of Mary Tsotsoo Laryea And Others v. Amarkai Laryea in which a lease agreement was admitted in evidence subject to a direction that it shall be stamped within ten (10) days after judgment.
2. That the Plaintiff/Respondent filed the unstamped document (Exhibit P) due to inadvertence.
3. That the Plaintiff/Respondent has