SERWAH v. SEFA

JUDGMENT OF AMMAH J.

The plaintiff by her writ of summons is claiming ¢200,000 damages against the defendant for slander. The writ of summons is accompanied by a statement of claim elaborating her claim.

[p.391]

The defendant is a son of the landlord of the plaintiff. It would appear that the defendant was at the material time not living in the house where the plaintiff was a tenant, but some of his relatives were living there with the plaintiff upstairs; the defendant was however visiting the house.

The plaintiff's case is that on 18 March 1985 at about 6.30 am she was giving her child tea when the defendant knocked at her door. She opened the door and came out. The defendant who was at the entrance asked her what nonsense she had said the previous day to his niece, Ama Dankwa. He then abused her as a bad woman with a bad character as that of her late father who stole and died after D.D.T. had been administered to him. The defendant continued to abuse her as a prostitute and that the child she claimed or claims to be that of Lawyer Senkyiri was or is not his. The plaintiff maintains the child is for Lawyer Senkyiri by customary marriage. According to the plaintiff the defendant went further to say that her family members were of bad character hence people were unwilling to marry from her family. The plaintiff gave the impression that the incident attracted many people to the house at the time. She denied having locked the defendant's niece in her room where a warrant officer then present had said the house would be turned into people's house. She admitted that Ama Dankwa, Hayford Kissi and Daniel Owusu lived with her upstairs in the house but denied that they accompanied the defendant when he came to knock at her door. This incident happened at the upper part of the house which the plaintiff was occupying with other relatives of the defendant, that is to say Ama Dankwa, Hayford Kissi and Daniel Owusu. Felix Addo Bamfo (who at the material time was living with a tenant downstairs) said he came out and stood near his verandah. He confirmed that the defendant abused the plaintiff as stated.

The impression given by the plaintiff was that she never replied to any abuse showered on her by the defendant. She felt her reputation had suffered and being aggrieved initiated this summons after the defendant had failed to apologise to her.

The defence case was that on 17 March 1985 the plaintiff had sent her maidservant one Cecilia Baidoo with ¢20 being rent t