MAHAMA AND ANOTHER v. MOSHIE

JUDGMENT OF BERKO AG. J.

The applicants were plaintiffs in an action instituted against the defendant-respondent in this court for the following reliefs:

[p.711]

(i) a declaration of title to that piece or parcel of land situated in Tamale with a building thereon and known as plot No. 46 in Ward A including title to the five rooms thereon—belonging to the co-plaintiff;

(ii) perpetual injunction restraining the defendant, his agents, successors and assigns from entering upon or doing anything on the said land and a further order restraining the defendant, his agents, successors and assigns from interfering with the co-plaintiff’s rights, title or enjoyment of her five rooms on plot No. 46, Tamale;

(iii) an order of account to be rendered by the defendant to the plaintiff for all rents and other moneys received by him due to the estate of the late Kurita Moshie;

(iv) damages for interfering with the estate of the late Kurita Moshie; and

(v) an order revoking the letters of administration granted to the defendant either alone or with others in either May or July 1978.

On 4 July 1985 the plaintiffs' claims against the defendant were dismissed. The court awarded costs of ¢600 against each of the plaintiffs in favour of the defendant. The plaintiffs appealed against the judgment of this court delivered on 4 July 1985 to the Court of Appeal by notice of appeal filed on 9 July 1985. The plaintiffs hereafter applied to this court on 15 July 1985 for stay of execution pending the determination of their appeal to this court of Appeal. This application was granted on 18 November 1985 subject to the payment of costs of ¢1,200 by the plaintiffs forthwith to the defendant. The plaintiffs applied to the court to review the conditional order of stay of execution granted on 18 November 1985 but that application was refused with costs of ¢100 in favour of the defendant. On 17 January 1986 the plaintiffs made a fresh application to the Court of Appeal for stay of execution.

At this stage it is relevant to state who have been solicitors for the parties from the commencement of the action. The original writ was issued in 1978 by E. D. Mahami as solicitor for the plaintiffs. Appearance was entered on behalf of the defendant by G. K. Mensa of Maligu Chambers, Tamale, who later on became known and called Mensa-Etsi. On 7 April 1981 A. A. Luguterah of Lugu Chambers, Tamale was appointed solicitor by the plaintiffs in place of E. D. Mahami. This is evidenced by the notice