THE REPUBLIC v. ABDUL AZIZ ASOMAH OF BEREKUM & ANOR

THE APPLICANT

This is for judgment on an application by the Applicant filed on 2 nd May, 2024 prayingthe Court to commit the Respondent for contempt for willfully conducting himself inamanner intended to interfere with the administration of justice, for willful conductexhibited to undermine the administration of justice and to prejudice the determinationof a writ the Applicant issued against him before the Court and that the Respondentexhibited conduct subjecting the administration of justice to public ridicule andlossofconfidence of the public in the administration of justice. According to the Applicant, when the writ was served on the Respondent he stayed away fromthe disputedplotand stopped developing it. That to the surprise of the Applicant and its elderstheRespondent trespassed unto the undeveloped portions of the plot by constructing a new structure up to roofing level. Considering the act of the Respondent as contemptuousthe Applicant caused his lawyer to apply for an order of interlocutory injunction.

The Applicant attached the writ of summons as exhibit “A” and the applicationforinterlocutory injunction as exhibit “B”. According to the Applicant, the applicationforinterlocutory injunction was served on the Respondent but he failed to file anaffidavitin opposition to it. The Applicant’s case is that despite the fact that the Respondent wasserved with the application for interlocutory injunction which seeks to restraintheRespondent from interfering with the disputed plot, the Respondent out of disrespectand flagrant disregard to the Court processes went ahead to improve the natureof theexisting building structure by fixing burglar proofs, pipes and constructing a manhole. The Applicant attached photographs to show the improvement of the buildingstructureby the Respondent as exhibits “C” and “D” all dated January and April 2024respectively to establish the point that all those events happened after the Applicantissued the writ of summons on 18 th August, 2023.

Regarding exhibit “D” the said improvement happened after the motion onnoticeforinterlocutory injunction was filed on 13 th March, 2024. The motion seeks for anorderofthe Court to restrain the Defendant Respondent, his agents, assigns, labourers, workmen, etc. from entering or in any other way interfering with the disputedPlot No. 64 Block C Sector 3 Berekum. The Applicant’s case is that the Respondent uponbeingserved with the motion on notice for interlocutory injunction willfully de