THE REPUBLIC vs ALHAJI AMINU SAANA & ORS
2019
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
- HER LADYSHIP, JUSTICE GIFTY AGYEI ADDO, HIGH COURT JUDGE.
Areas of Law
- Civil Procedure
- Evidence Law
- Property and Real Estate Law
2019
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
The Applicants sought committal of Respondent Alhaji Aminu Saana for contempt after a 2017 High Court judgment in Suit No. FAL/43/2013 declared their title over a Nungua New Town parcel, granted possession, authorized demolition, and perpetually restrained the judgment debtor and persons claiming through him from interference. Execution in December 2018 put the Applicants in possession; they alleged Respondent and land guards trespassed, harassed workers during demolition, and disputed the land’s scope at East Legon Police Station. Respondent denied trespass, claimed he remained on his adjoining land, and complained Applicants demolished his wall. Justice Gifty Agyei Addo confirmed there was an operative order and that Respondent knew of it and was bound as the Defendant’s representative, but found the Applicants failed to prove wilful disobedience beyond reasonable doubt because they did not adduce evidence beyond affidavits or seek cross‑examination to dislodge Respondent’s denials. The court dismissed the application and awarded GH¢3,000 costs to Respondent.
The Applicants on 31st of October 2018, instituted this action for the committal of the Respondent, Alhaji Aminu Saana, to prison for contempt of Court.
The application was subsequently amended on 25th of January, 2019. This was followed up with two supplementary affidavits filed on 19th of March, 2019 and 9th of April, 2019.
AMENDED MOTION ON NOTICE FOR COMMITTAL OF THE RESPONDENT TO PRISON FOR CONTEMPT OF COURT
The gravamen of the Applicants‟ case is as follows: Per their amended motion on notice for committal of the Respondent to prison for contempt of Court, the case of the Applicants is that upon the institution of an action by the Applicants herein against one Kwow Richardson in respect of land, in Suit No. FAL/43/2013, this Court differently constituted, on 20th October 2017, gave judgment in favour of the Applicants.
The Applicants attached to the application Exhibit „A‟, the said judgment.
According to the Applicants, the entry of judgment flowing from the judgment was subsequently served on the Defendant.
In support of this, the Applicants relied on Exhibit „B‟ attached to the application.
The Applicants continue that following service of the entry of judgment on the Defendant therein, the Defendant filed an application for stay of execution pending appeal as per Exhibit „C‟ and followed this up with an application to set aside the judgment.
It is the Applicants‟ case that as happened in interlocutory applications to the Court prior and subsequent to the application to set aside the judgment, on the day of the hearing of the application to set aside the judgment, the Defendant was represented by the Respondent herein.
The Applicants attached to the application Exhibit „D‟, proceedings of the day.
In the said proceedings, the Respondent herein is stated as present and representing the Defendant therein.
The Applicants further state that the application to set aside the judgment was dismissed.
Also according to the Applicants per their paragraph 10, in the judgment of the Court dated 20th October, 2017, the Court, inter alia, perpetually restrained the Defendant, his agents, assigns, privies, heirs, workmen, servants and all persons claiming through the Defendant from trespassing or undertaking any development of, dealing with, interrupting or interfering in any manner with the Applicants‟ ownership and quiet enjoyment of the land.
According to the Applicants‟ paragraph 12, on 17th of December, 2018, the judgment of the Court was execu