Try asking the following...
RULING
RULING ON MOTION ON NOTICE SEEKING LEAVE TO RE-OPEN 2ND
DEFENDANT’S CASE
The Plaintiff herein originally caused a Writ of Summons to be issued on 9th
December 2010 against the occupants of the property being the subject matter of
the instant suit. The suit got struck out on some occasions which was relisted and
also suffered series of adjournments including sine die adjournments.
In the Amended Writ of Summons filed on 21st March, 2019 pursuant to an order
of this Court, the Plaintiff claims against the Defendants jointly and severally for
the following reliefs:
a. Declaration of title to one (1) house numbered 83, Community 8
situated and being at a place commonly known and called cooperative, Community 8, Tema.
b. Ejectment and recovery of possession of the said property.
On 2nd April, 2019 the 1st Defendant filed her Amended Statement of Defence
pursuant to an order for joinder and denied the claims of the Plaintiff and further
stated that the Plaintiff is not entitled to his claim. The 2nd Defendant on same
date also filed his Statement of Defence and counterclaimed against the Plaintiff
as follows:
1. A Declaration that House No. 83 Cooperative Community 8 Tema is the
property of the 2nd Defendant.
2. An order setting aside the auction sale of House No. 83 Cooperative
Community 8 Tema.
The Plaintiff on 8th August 2019 filed a Reply and Defence to the 2nd Defendant’s
counterclaim.
The hearing of the instant action has ended and the Court was about to give its
judgment when the instant application was filed on 8th June 2023.
In his affidavit in support the 2nd Defendant/Applicant deposed that on the 1st
day of March 2023, the Honourable Court ordered him to be joined to the suit as
the 2nd Defendant at a time when he had filed a witness statement to testify on
behalf of the Defendant. That he filed the witness statement on the 2nd of April
2019 referring to exhibits which had been previously attached to his witness
statement of the 22nd of January 2019.
The Applicant further deposed that the said exhibits though indicated in the
paragraphs of his witness statement were inadvertently not attached to his
witness statement of the 2nd of April 2019 to be tendered in evidence. That it was
when his counsel was reviewing the proceedings of the Court whilst preparing
the written address that this omission was noticed. That this was an oversight by
his counsel and as a party this omission should not be visited on him.
The A