HAUSA v. HARUNA

JUDGMENT OF LASSEY J.

The proceedings in this administrative suit commenced with a motion filed by the plaintiff in this court under Order 60, r. 1 of the Supreme [High] Court (Civil Procedure) Rules, 1954,1 for a grant of letters of administration to her to administer the estate of her husband, the late Alhaji Iddi of Tamale who died in February 1962.

Against the plaintiff's said application the defendant, who claims to be the nephew of the deceased, entered a caveat. Upon the parties failing to come to any agreement between them the procedure laid down under Order 60, rr. 18 and 20 of the Supreme [High] Court (Civil Procedure) Rules, 19542 was followed, and the plaintiff issued a writ of summons against the caveator under the provisions of rule 21 (2) of the said order.

The plaintiff's claim is for a declaration that she is entitled to a grant of letters of administration in respect of the estate of her husband Alhaji Iddi (deceased). After the pleadings had closed, the plaintiff filed a summons for directions pursuant to Order 30, r. 1 of the Supreme [High] Court (Civil Procedure) Rules, 1954, and on the 16th January, 1963, the summons was heard and the issues set out therein were agreed and settled for trial.

The basis of the plaintiff's claim for letters to administer the estate is that as she is the only surviving wife of the late Alhaji Iddi and that as she and her late husband were Moslems to which law she and her late husband were subject, she is the proper person entitled to administer the estate; she pleaded that according to Mohammedan law or religion she is entitled to a greater interest in her late husband's estate.

The defendant, on the other hand, denied the plaintiff's right to a grant of letters of administration and pleaded that he is a nephew of the deceased and therefore the proper person entitled according to the Gonja native customary law to a grant of letters of administration.

The facts are briefly as follows: the deceased Alhaji Iddi, a man from Northern Ghana, died at Tamale some time in February, 1962, leaving him [p.214] surviving one widow who is the plaintiff. According to the evidence of the plaintiff, she was married to the deceased according to Mohammedan law for over 40 years, but there was no issue of the marriage. It is admitted on the pleadings that the only surviving sister of the deceased Alhaji Iddi is Memuna Bakoa. The deceased had one house on plot No. 27 at Tamale which was a subject-matter of dispu