JUDGMENT OF EDUSEI J.
The plaintiff is applying for further and better particulars of paragraphs (5) and (16) of the statement of defence after her solicitor’s letter of such request to the defendant's solicitor had been turned down.
Paragraph (5) of the statement of defence states as follows:
"Paragraph (4), (5) and (6) of the statement of claim are denied. The house in question is the self-acquired property of the late Ekra Kobina brother of the late Adjua Twintoh." The plaintiff would like to know the way and manner the late Ekra Kobina acquired house No. 33/11 Boundary Road, Sekondi, the subject-matter in dispute. Paragraph (16) of the statement of defence also states:
"In further answer to these paragraphs the defendant confirms that he bought the house in question from the late Ekra Kobina with full knowledge of his family and has been in possession ever since. The defendant denies that the plaintiff has at any time, since the defendant took possession of the house, made any claim to it before the institution of this action."
The whole purpose of pleading is to set out in a summary form the material facts on which a party relies for his claim or defence so that the opposite party is not taken by surprise at the trial. The opposite party must come to court knowing the case he has to meet. It is on these principles that further and better statement of particulars will be ordered by this court.
[p.279]
In taking paragraph (2) of the statement of defence I would ask: what are the facts on which the defendant relies to say that house No. 33/11 Boundary Road, Sekondi, is the self-acquired property of Ekra Kobina who sold the said house to the defendant? The nature of self-acquisition of the house by Ekra Kobina must be known to the opposite party, for merely saying that it was the self-acquired property is not enough. Did Ekra Kobina build the house himself or did he buy it from a third party by means of a deed of conveyance or according to customary law or by an auction through a court's order? The way and manner of the acquisition must succinctly be stated in the pleadings, for the statement that it was the self-acquired property of Ekra Kobina is a conclusion based on facts and it is therefore a legal phenomenon but pleadings must contain facts and not law. Having stated that it was the self-acquired property of Ekra Kobina the defendant should have proceeded to give facts constituting how it became the self-acquired property of his vendor. If
