KOFI AMOKWANDOH
1932
WEST AFRICAN COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
Areas of Law
- Civil Procedure
- Contract Law
- Evidence Law
1932
WEST AFRICAN COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
AI Generated Summary
The plaintiff appealed a decision that favored the defendants who had refused to pay rent under a lease. The co-defendant claimed the property was actually family property and not the plaintiff's. The court ruled that the co-defendant was rightly joined in the suit, and that oral evidence was admissible to explain the terms of the lease, confirming that the property was family-owned. However, there was a dissenting opinion stating there was no evidence the plaintiff acted on behalf of the family, and the appeal should be allowed.
The following judgments were delivered :-
DEANE, c.J. THE GOLD COAST COLONY.
This is an appeal from a decision of Yates, J. confirming a judgment of the Police Magistrate Winneba in favour of the defendants on a claim for possession and mesne profits.
The facts may be shortly stated. By Indenture dated 15th March, 1923, the plaintiff demised to the African and Eastern Trade Corporation Limited, now represented by the United Africa Company Limited (hereinafter called the first defendants), certain premises with a store thereon situated at Winneba at a rental of £54 per annum on an annual lease in which were contained provisions for extending the term from time to time at the option of the lessees and also giving to the plaintiff (the lessor) the right of re-entry six months after demand on the failure of the lessees to observe their covenants to pay rent or otherwise.
The first defendants were duly let into possession of the premises by the plaintiff and paid rent to him in accordance with the terms of the lease for some time, but on the 29th April, 1930, as they had refused to pay rent to him any longer, the plaintiff gave them notice to quit and deliver up possession of the premises six months after the date of the notice. On the 18th of December, 1930, as they had refused either to comply with the terms of the notice to quit or to pay the rent, the plaintiff took out a writ in the Police Magistrate's Court at Winneba claiming possession of the demised premises and mesne profits of the same from the date of the receipt by the first defendants of the notice to quit.
On the 15th of January, 1931, before the case against the first defendants could be heard, one Adjuah Attah filed an ex parte motion in the suit asking that she should be joined as a co-defendant in the matter: in her affidavit in support of the motion she alleged that the premises, the subject matter of this lease, were the property not of the plaintiff but of the family to which the plaintiff belonged as a junior member, and of which she herself was head and custodian of the family property; that the first defendants were the tenants of the family and not of the plaintiff, and that it was at her request as such head of the family that they had refused to pay the rent of the demised premises to the plaintiff. On the same date, i.e. the 15th of January, 1931, the learned Magistrate made under Schedule 2 Order 3 Rule 5 of the Rules of the Supreme Court an order that Adjuah Attah should be j