ANKOMAH BROTHERS & ORS VS OPANIN KWASI TANDOH & ANOR

LOVELACE-JOHNSON (MS. ) JSC: -

The designation of the parties at the Judicial Committee of the Wassa Fiase Traditional Council (JCWFTC) will be maintained in this appeal.

On the 17th day of March 1994, one J M K Ankomah informed the Registrar of the Judicial Committee of the Wassa Fiase Traditional Council that they wished to“institute a writ of summons” against the defendants per a process with the understated title accompanied by a five paragraph affidavit in support.

The said affidavit called upon the defendants who claimed to be royal members and kingmakers of the Tarkwa Banso Stool to appear before the JCWFTC to prove how they became s Stool family and Kingmakers in the light of certain facts they had stated in their affidavit in support.

1. Ankomah Brothers 2. Nana James Cobbina PLAINTIFFS 3. General Abusuapayin, Opanin Kwabina Berfuo 4. Opanin Kofi Attako AND 1. Opanin Kwasi Tandoh 2. Opanin Kwabina Kyei 3. Opanin Yaw Bempeh DEFENDANTS 4. Obaapanin Attia All of Tarkwa Banso On 22nd day of April 1994, the defendants filed a process entitled “DEFENCE FOR APPLICATION FOR WRIT OF SUMMONS” and stated as follows therein We the defendants deny the averments in paragraphs 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 of the application of writ of summons and at the hearing will put the plaintiffs to strict proof of all the assertions”The process was addressed to the Registrar and to the “Panel members, Wassa Fiase Traditional Council, Tarkwa. ”The defendants followed this up with an affidavit in opposition sworn to on 5th May 1994 which stated in part at paragraphs 3, 4, and 5 as follows 1. That we have been served with an affidavit together with so-called writ of summons which in fact is no writ at all 2. That we nevertheless deny all assertions contained in the affidavit and what seem to be the statement of claim which the Plaintiffs themselves labelled as evidence.

3. That the so called writ of summons does not conform to any mode of starting Chieftaincy dispute and therefore must be dismissed with heavy cost After a few preliminary issues such as the failure to pay the required deposits, interim injunction, exclusion of the names of some of the parties were dealt with by motion and rulings given, the substantive matter was heard on its merits and judgment given for the plaintiffs.

The defendants, being dissatisfied with the judgment appealed to the Judicial Committee of the Western Regional House of Chiefs (JCWRHC) on the following grounds(i) The Judicial Committee of the