VICTOR ODARTEI MILLS vs DR. NII KOTEY DJANE

This is an Application by the Plaintiff/Applicant praying the Court for an order staying the execution of the Judgment complained of pending the determination of an appeal lodged against the said Judgment by the Applicant.

The Application was resisted by the Defendant/Respondent.

A perusal of the Application depicts the Applicant is in Court seeking an order staying the execution of the Judgment of this Court.

This calls for an examination of the Judgment complained of to enable the Court determine the orders the Applicant is praying the Court to stay.

In support of the Application, Counsel for the Applicant submits that between the grantors of the parties, the Applicant’s grantor was adjudged the owner of the subject land when the two grantors litigated over the same land.

In the circumstance Counsel submits that the doctrine of ‘resjudicta’ clearly estops the Defendant from laying claim to the land.

There is evidence before me that during the trial the Applicant brought an Application for the dismissal of the case per the reason stated supra.

However, on the 2nd day of June, 2015 my sister, Her Ladyship Hafisata Amaleboba dismissed the Application.

There is no evidence before me that the Applicant appealed against the said decision.

There is evidence before me that on the superimposition of the site plan of the Applicant’s grantor, the report came out that the land claimed by the Applicant is located far away from the disputed land.

On the issue of limitation, the Applicant himself testified that it is the Respondent who is in possession of the subject land.

In the circumstance I hold that the issue of limitation does not arise in this case.

In NB Land Mark Ltd. v Lakhani [2001-2002] SCGLR at page 320 held:

“Now it is trite learning that an application for stay of execution, presupposes that the order or decision in respect of which the stay is sought is capable of being executed by any of the known processes of execution. If the order or decision is incapable of being executed, an application for stay of execution cannot be applied in respect of it. Thus in Eboe v Eboe [1961] 1GLR 432 Ollennu J (as he then was) held that a declaration that the Defendant was a trustee did not require any person to do anything or abstain from doing anything and there was no method of executing it. Consequently there could be no application to stay the said order. Citing with approval this decision in Eboe v Eboe (supra) Taylor JSC in his dissenting opinio