AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK vs WEBB BUILDERS LIMITED & ANOR. & ANOTHER

This Ruling is in respect of a Motion on Notice for Stay of Execution of the Judgment of this Court which was delivered on 14th February, 2023.

I have read through the Motion Paper, Affidavit in support, the Supplementary Affidavit in Support with attached Exhibits.

I have also read through the affidavit in opposition and given careful consideration to the written submissions filed by Counsel on both sides on behalf of the Claimant Applicant (hereinafter referred to as Applicant) and the Plaintiff Execution Creditor Respondent (hereinafter referred to as Respondent).

The grounds for the instant application is that Applicant is aggrieved with the Judgment of this Court in respect of the Interpleader Proceedings which is to the effect that the 2nd Defendant Judgment Debtor’s interest in the attached property be severed and sold off and the proceeds used to defray his indebtedness to Respondent.

That the said property was largely built with Applicant’s resources and so in the unlikely event that the said property is sold, she would be deprived of her interest in the said property which she alleges is a matrimonial property. Due to the fact that she is aggrieved with the decision of the Court, she has appealed against the said decision and the issue for the appellate Court to answer is whether a property acquired in the course of marriage as a matrimonial property can be sold by virtue of one party’s action without the consent of the other; which raises a serious question of Law.

That Applicant shall suffer greater hardship and irreparable damage should the instant application be refused.

The grounds for opposing the instant application are that Applicant knew about the loan transaction between the Execution Creditor and the Defendant Judgment Debtors as she is a director of 1st Defendant Company and was also a witness to the transaction which culminated in the proceedings before this Court.

That Applicant cannot hide under the cloak of “matrimonial property” to deprive the Execution Creditor; an innocent third party of its legitimate interest.

That the said judgment gave Applicant the first option to buy out the interest of the 2nd Defendant Judgment Debtor after it is valued. Failing this, the property was to be sold so that the 50% interest of 2nd Defendant Judgment Debtor could be applied towards the satisfaction of the judgment debt. Flowing from this, Applicant therefore cannot claim that she will suffer greater and irreparable damage in case the