AZU CRABBE J.S.C: On 9 November 1970 when the above appeal came on for hearing, neither the claimant- appellant (the applicant herein) nor his counsel attended the court, and the appeal was struck out for want of prosecution. The claimant-appellant has now brought this application for an order to relist the appeal for hearing, pursuant to rule 23 (2) of the Supreme Court Rules, 1962 (L.I.218).
In Adjani v. Agyeman III (Court of Appeal, 6 November 1969, unreported; digested in (1970) C. C. 14) this court said that it would not grant indulgence to a party who had not been diligent and stated the grounds upon which it would exercise its discretion under rule 23 (2) as follows:
“The granting of an application under rule 23 (2) is not a matter of course; it is entirely in the discretion of this court, a discretion which will be exercised judicially,’according to the rules of reason and justice’ (Rooke’s Case, 77 E.R. 209). In exercising this discretion the court will take into consideration…