YAW AH PER J. M. ARYEEQUA YE

The following judgments were delivered :-

DEANE, C.J. THE GOLD COAST COLONY.

This is an appeal from an order of the Commissioner Eastern Province confirming an ex parte order made by him on 28th July, 1930, for the payment over to the plaintiff of monies collected by the receiver appointed in the suit.

The facts as they appear from the record are shortly as follows:

On 1st February, 1929, the plaintiff obtained a judgment against defendant in the Tribunal of the Ga 1Ifauche. Against this judgment the defendant appealed to the Provincial Commissioner, but his appeal was dismissed.

He then appealed to the West African Court of Appeal. While his appeal was pending, the plaintiff obtained an order ex parte restraining him from receiving the rents of the property which was the subject of litigation. The defendant applied that that order should be set aside and a receivel be appointed pending the result of his appeal to the West African Court of Appeal. That application was acceded to, and a receiver appointed who has been receiving the rents of the property with the exception of rent due by a Syrian who held a lease over part of the property and who, apparently, has not paid anything. On 1st July, 1930, the West African Court of Appeal gave judgment dismissing appellant's appeal with costs and, in effect, affirming the judgment of the Ga Manche Tribunal. Plaintiff thereupon as the successful party before the Tribunal applied ex parte and obtained from the Provincial Commissioner the order of 28th July. Defendant moved to set aside the order, and it is against the refusal of the Commissioner to set aside the order that this appeal is brought.

The sole question I take it which this Court has to decide is whether the Commissioner's order was justified or not, and for the determination of that question it will be necessary to refer to the judgment given before the Ga Manche to see whether the order of the Commissioner comes with the scope of the judgment which he was purporting to carry out as having been confirmed by the Court of Appeal. What I may call the operative part of the judgment is to be found on pages 41-42 of the record and runs as follows :-

"The Councillors therefore give judgment in favour of plaintiff and direct that defendant. should remain a caretaker of the property.

"The defendant should give the plaintiff's share of the monies received on account of the property. If the lease is already executed it should be cancelled and fresh one to b