GH - SEY v. CROMWELL AND ANOTHER

JUDGMENT OF CHARLES CRABBE J.

The plaintiff is seeking, in this case, a declaration that a house situate at Agona junction known as the Ghana National Trading Corporation retail stores, hereinafter referred to as G.N.T.C., formerly the property of the late Joseph O'Neil Cromwell, is vested in her by virtue of her appointment as customary successor of the late George O'Neil Cromwell, a devisee of the late Joseph O'Neil Cromwell. She is also asking for the payment of the sum of ¢432.00 being accrued rents in respect of the store in that house rented to the second defendants at the rate of ¢24.00 per month, which rent has been outstanding since March 1969. She is also claiming as well mesne profits.

[p.414]

By her statement of claim the plaintiff states that she is the customary successor to, and legal representative of the estate of, George O'Neil Cromwell. The first defendant is the daughter of late Joseph O'Neil Cromwell. The late Joseph O'Neil Cromwell by his will bequeathed his property at Agona junction to the late George O'Neil Cromwell and his wife Ama Esson. The property was shared between them and the house, the subject-matter of this action, was given to the late George O'Neil Cromwell. When George O'Neil Cromwell died, members of his family, the Ntwaa family of Dixcove, met and Matilda Brace, the original plaintiff was appointed his successor. She was granted letters of administration at Sekondi by the High Court on 8 February 1969. Some time in October 1969, the first defendant brought an action against G.N.T.C. who were the tenants of the plaintiff, claiming rents for the store. Upon application by the second defendants the plaintiff was joined as a third party but this joinder was subsequently set aside on 11 August 1970, for the failure of the second defendants to take the necessary steps. The second defendants have refused to pay the rent to the plaintiff since March 1969, and the first defendant has threatened to remove the second defendants' property from the store.

For her part, the first defendant avers that when the plaintiff 's predecessor failed to protect her interest in a suit at the circuit court, judgment was entered for the first defendant. Consequent upon that judgment, the second defendants paid to the first defendant the rents due on the property. She contends that the sum claimed by way of rent has already been paid to the entitled person by an order of a court of competent jurisdiction and that that order had not been s

JUDGMENT OF CHARLES CRABBE J.

[p.414]

SEY v. CROMWELL AND ANOTHER

Areas of Law

JUDGMENT