NANA ADWOA EFFIA & ORS v. NANA TAIBA II & ORS

J U D G M E N T

WOOD (MRS) C.J:

On the 25th of October, 2007, the Judicial Committee of the National House of Chiefs dismissed the appeal from the adjudicating body of the Western Regional House of Chiefs, that is’ the Judicial Committee of the House. Dissatisfied, the petitioners/ appellants are, by way of an appeal to this court, challenging the said decision on the following grounds:

GROUNDS OF APPEAL

“1. The Judicial Committee of the National House of Chiefs erred when they relied on extraneous matters which did not form part of the record of Appeal to deliver their judgment.

2. The Judicial Committee of the National House of Chiefs erred when they held that the Petitioners/Appellants herein cannot maintain the present action as their family member had sometime ago instituted an action against some of the Respondents herein and they should go to the Judicial committee of the Regional House of Chiefs to continue with the hearing of the matter.

3. The Judicial committee of the National House of Chiefs erred when they affirmed the position taken by the Judicial committee of the Regional House of Chiefs that failing to file reply constitutes an admission of the averments contained in the statement of Defence.

4. The Judicial committee of the National House of Chiefs erred by affirming the wrong procedure adopted by the Respondents by allowing the Respondents to orally raise a preliminary objection to the competence of the petitioners action.

5. The judgment is against the weight of evidence on record.”

The facts which triggered the original action before the Judicial Committee of the Western Regional House are not at all complex. On the 20th of April 2000, the appellants filed a petition against the Respondents before this body for the following reliefs:

“A) A declaration that the petitioners are the owners and Kingmakers of the Royal Sewuah Paramount Stool of Bamiankor.

B) A declaration that the purported nomination, election and enstoolment of Henry Acquah a.k.a. Angama Tu Agyan without the knowledge, consent and authorization of the Petitioners is null and void and therefore a nullity.

C) An injunction restraining the Respondents from nominating, electing or enstooling any person as Omanhene of the Paramount Stool of Bamiankor.

D) An injunction restraining the 4th Respondent from holding himself out as Omanhene of Gwira Traditional Area or performing the functions associated with that effect.”

The Respondent entered conditional appeara