JUDGMENT OF ABBAN J.
In this application, the defendant is asking for an order striking out the writ of summons or dismissing the suit either under Order 25, r. 4 of the Supreme [High] Court (Civil Procedure) Rules, 1954 (L.N. 140A), or under the court's inherent jurisdiction on the ground that both the writ and the statement of claim do not disclose any reasonable cause of action. The writ of summons states as follows:
“The Plaintiffs’ claim against the defendant is a declaration that until rules regulating civil appeals to the Supreme Court have been made, the defendant is not entitled to go into execution against the plaintiffs for the balance of the judgment debt awarded to the defendant by the Court of Appeal in C.F.A.O. v. Zacca.
In the alternative, the plaintiffs claim against the defendant an order that the defendant furnish good and sufficient security to the plaintiffs to cover the whole of the said judgment debt and costs before the plaintiffs are called upon to satisfy the said balance of the judgment debt.
[p.163]
And the plaintiffs also claim an injunction restraining the defendant from going into execution pending the hearing of the plaintiffs' appeal by the Supreme Court or until the defendant furnish a good and sufficient security to the plaintiffs to cover the said judgment debt and costs.”
From the pleadings and from the affidavits filed herein, the following facts are not in dispute. That is, the plaintiffs sued one S. Zacca in the High Court, Kumasi, suit No. D.C. 215/62 for certain sums of money alleged to be the balance of instalments due on a hire-purchase price and cost of labour done and materials alleged to have been sold to the said S. Zacca.
On the application of the said S. Zacca, the present defendant-applicant was joined as a third party to that quit. The defendant-applicant, as a third counterclaimed for damages against the plaintiffs for unlawful seizure of the tractor by the plaintiffs, the, tractor being the subject of the said hire-purchase agreement. The High Court, Kumasi, heard the case and gave its judgment. Both the plaintiffs and the defendant-applicant (as the third party) however appealed against the said judgment of the High Court, Kumasi, to the then Court of Appeal. The defendant-applicant's main ground of appeal was against the damages awarded as being inadequate. On 15 August 1969, the Court of Appeal in its judgment (Zacca v. C.F.A.O. unreported; digested in (1969) C.C. 156) dismissed the plaint
