YUSIF MOHAMMED v. ABUBAKARI FATUMA
2013
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
- ISAAC DUOSE, JA (PRESIDING)
- K.A.ACQUAYE, JA
- SAEED K.GYAN, JA
Areas of Law
- Civil Procedure
- Property and Real Estate Law
- Probate and Succession
2013
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
In the Ghana Court of Appeal, Saeed Kwaku Gyan, JA authored a judgment on an appeal by Yussif Mohammed challenging the High Court’s refusal to permit amendment of the house number describing the disputed Nima, Accra property in both the writ and the court’s judgment. The litigation history was convoluted: the original pleadings identified House No. C134/5; post‑judgment motions and a July 2003 ruling relating to letters of administration referred to House No. E145/3; during later enforcement and contempt proceedings the plaintiff sought to re‑number the property to C431/5, alleging fraudulent manipulation by Fatima Abubakar and her children. The Court of Appeal reviewed principles of amendment and appellate restraint, noted that C.I.47 Order 16 rule 7(2) bars amendments to judgments, found multiple conflicting property numbers without authoritative proof or fresh evidence, and held the application tardy and futile. The High Court’s refusal was affirmed and the appeal dismissed.
SAEED KWAKU GYAN, JA: The Plaintiff, by this appeal, seeks an order of the Court of Appeal to reverse the discretionary decision of the High Court, Accra, presided over by K.Amissah-Koomson, J by which the said Court declined the Plaintiff’s application to amend the House number of the property in dispute as originally indorsed in the Writ of Summons, and same recorded in the Judgment of the trial court as far back as 2003.
An examination of the record of Appeal reveals that the conduct of the case at the court below took several rather strange twists and turns with the Plaintiff being granted leave, on various occasions, to amend his pleadings, including the indorsement on the Writ of Summons in a Substantial way even after judgment had been delivered in the case on 13/2/2003. A number of Reviews of the Judgment were sought and apparently granted in favour of the Plaintiff.
The background to the instant appeal may be briefly outlined as follows:
By his Writ of Summons filed on 11th March, 1999 the Plaintiff sought a Declaration that he was the bonafide purchaser for value without notice, and, therefore, the owner of House No_C 134/5, Nima Accra, or, in the alternative, recovery of the purchase price of the said house with interest.
By his Statement of Claim, the Plaintiff contended that the purchase of the house was originally evidenced by a receipt dated 31/12/97 and also, subsequently, by a “conveyance on the house” executed by the Defendant.
It does seem obvious to me, reading the Statement of Defence filed on 23/4/1999, (page 16 of the record) that the identity of the property in dispute, as stated by the Plaintiff in the indorsement of his Writ and the Statement of Claim was not really in doubt. The Defendant appeared only to dispute the alleged sale of the house in question.
When the Plaintiff amended his Statement of Claim on 20/7/99 he maintained the same house number, namely CI34/5 Nima, Accra (see paragraph 1 thereof on page 22 of the record.) That House number was maintained in the issues contained in the Summons for Directions filed on 21/7/99. Indeed, in an Affidavit supporting a Motion for Interlocutory Injunction filed on 28/6/2000 (page 45 of the record), the Plaintiff’s Lawful Attorney, Sulemana Mohammed, declared that he lived in H/No_ C134/5, Nima, Accra, which is the house identified in the indorsement of the Writ of Summons as the property in dispute.
Intriguingly, at page 71 of the record can be found a Motion on Notice for