TAKORADI TIMBERS LIMITED V. AMUAH

TWUMASI J.

The plaintiff-respondent, hereafter called the plaintiff, issued a specially indorsed writ claiming the sum of ¢12,000 against the defendant-applicant, hereafter called the defendant. Pursuant to his writ, the plaintiff by a summons filed on 2 February 1982 applied for summary judgment. The defendant filed a statement of defence, which in the view of the court, disclosed a triable issue. In the circumstances, the court granted him leave to defend the action. From that stage, rules of procedure required the plaintiff to file a reply to the statement of defence and follow it up with a summons for directions under the High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules, 1954 (L.N. 140A), Orders 23 and 36 respectively, before the case could be tried but the court directed that the case be tried summarily on 12 January 1983. The submission by the defendant’s counsel that non-compliance with Orders 23 and 36 vitiated the proceedings was therefore misconceived.

With regard to the trial of the case,…