Tamale, April 25, GNA - Mr. Sumani Zakari, a Tamale building contractor, has petitioned the Chief Justice to investigate what he called an "unfair ruling" against him by a Tamale High Court. In a petition dated April 22, 2008 and copied to the press, Mr. Zakari said "The decision to petition you has been informed by a singular act of indiscretion exhibited by Mr. Justice Simon Suurbarea, a Tamale High Court Judge, in clear disregard of a ruling in my favour by the Appeal Court, in a case between the National Investment Bank (NIB) and myself."

In the petition Mr Zakari stated that the NIB had rented and stayed in his building for 25 years and left the building dilapidated as a result of which he filed a suit at the Tamale High Court against the bank and the trial judge then, Mr Justice Victor C. Doegah, ruled in his favour.

On January 21, 2008 the NIB's appeal at the Court of Appeal was struck out and an application for relistment filed by the bank on February 26, 2008 was also struck out. The court awarded GH¢300 cost against the NIB.

On April 8, 2008, he said, the court again struck out another NIB motion for relistment with a GH¢ 500 cost in Mr Zakari's favour and expressed its displeasure at the defendant's conduct. "As a result of this development, the NIB issued a cheque on April 10, 2008 to settle the judgment debt of GH¢ 500", Mr Zakari said adding:

"When I approached the Court Registrar to pay the money to me, he asked for an order from the court before he could effect payment so I instructed my lawyer to file a motion on my behalf"

Mr Zakari said when the case was called, the trial judge refused to even hear the motion, citing contempt of court against him. He said after striking out two appeals and three motions the NIB filed, the Appeal Court settled the case and directed the High Court to execute the judgement but the High Court Judge in Tamale refused to carry out the direction given by the Court of Appeal.

"Even though my counsel and I did not carry out any execution, the NIB willingly complied with the orders of the Court of Appeal by issuing a cheque for payment of the judgement debt."

"The High Court judge prevented the operations of the orders of the Court of Appeal based on the excuse that the NIB had filed a motion of contempt against my counsel and I for carrying out the execution of the court order", he said

"Your Lordship, the trial judge arrived at this mysterious judgement not withstanding the fact that the Court of Appeal rule C.I.19 states that once the record of appeal is transmitted to the Court of Appeal, the trial court cannot consider any motion."

"Indeed there is no valid motion pending before the High Court, which could have stopped the execution by reason of rule 21 of C.I.19. The motion for contempt was not filed as a new case but as a motion in the pending case, which has come to a file conclusion"

"By reason of rule 21, the High Court is incompetent to consider any such motion and the High Court judge's decision is either borne out of ignorance of the law or a clear personal interest in the case", the petitioner said.

Mr Zakari said the High Court Judge's decision to ignore the judgement of the Court of Appeal suggested that he had acted in contempt of a superior court and he needed to be brought to order. He said in denying him the cheque, the judge again erred by not fixing a date for the hearing of the case, leaving him uncertain about when the case would continue, adding: "In effect, the High Court Judge has acted as a Supreme Court and denied the operation of a judgement of both the High Court and the Court of Appeal"

"He has impeded the administration of justice by denying the execution of a valid judgement of the court".

Mr. Zakari therefore prayed the Chief Justice "to come to his aid by investigating the case and using her good offices to enable him to taste the true meaning of rule of law".