Alpha M.L. Tarawally And Others v Sahr M. Marrah (MISC APP 39 of 2016) [2020] SLCA 27 (15 March 2020)

co IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF Si LEON} CIVIL. DIVISION MISC. APP. 39/16 ALPHA MOHAMED LAMIN (ALL MRS AMINATA SAPATEH y. FATHER MUC: AND ERPRI ~ APPLICANTS iD D MARRAH (sut [ROUGH HIS LAWFUL ATTORNEY SORIE RA) ~ RESPONDENT REPRESENTATION: iN AUGUSTINE MARAIL COUNSEL THE APPELLANT | MOHAMED P. FOF ANAH ESQ. COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT | k |

if

— [(o60-

z RULING DELIVERED BY TriE HON. MR SENGU MOHAMED KOROMA JSC ON THE MARCH, 2020.

1, The Appellant/Applicant (hereinafter referred to as the “Applicant”) by a Notice of Motion dated 23% September, 2019 applied to this Honourable Court for the following Orders:~

* An interim and/or Interlocutory Stay of Exegution of tht Judgment dated 13" May, 2016 and all subséuent edings ranted, ending the hearing and determinationgf this @pplication and/or appeal.

* An Order to set aside sution“Teyied on the 30" day of May 2018 against the Appellant/Applicants dtiging the pendency of the application forGay of Execution Court below on the grounds that the e@éution Wadirregulathunfair and an abuse of the process of the Gourt.

* An i and/ominterlocutory Order of restitution be granted PEbmitting Ws Appefinv/Applicant to be reinstated into the property

“a < ted 15 HorS® Shoe Road, Kissy Dockyard Freetown pending the éaringeataeétermination of this application and/or appeal

‘* Any@ipfther or other Order(s) that this Honourable Court may deem fit and just.

= Costs

RULING SNK /eK | 2

; —lol

1. The Application is supported by the affidavit of Aminata Sapateh swom to in Freewwn on the 23" day of September, 219 together with the exhibits : attached thereto.

2. This application is opposed by the Respondent by the affidavit of Sorie Kamara swom to on the 12" day of November, 2019 together with the exhibits attached thereto.

3. The Applicant responds to the affidavit in oppositiogf/by an aftidavit in reply sworn to on the 21" day of November, 2019. 4. ‘The Applicant responds to the affidavit in ofPasition an affidavitin reply sworn to on the 21" day of November,2019. THE APPLICATION

5. The application is moved by Augi S Maré ‘on the 27" November, 2019. He refers to theftwelve exhibitSih support of the Applicant's case. These exhibits range faim the Death, certifi€ate of the late Foday Lamin Tarawallie, Ext Sh Conve¥aince in respect of the property in dispute of S?, Lette got Adimitiéfation granted to the Applicant A S*, Vesting Dee 19" N@yember, 2019 vesting the property in the I" and yOrRPBlicants chibiyJA S*, Writ of Summons issued against the *: by the Respondent , Exhibit A S*, Summary Judgment in favour of THOEspordengE xhibit A S*, Copy of Application for stay of Execution of the ‘Sad Judgment, Exhibit A $"°, Order refusing stay of execution marked Exfibit AS"? to copy of Notice and Grounds of Appeal dated 18" May, 2016 Exhibit AS", a

6. Germaine to this application are paragraphs 5, 6, 7, 15, 16 and 17 of the allidavit in support. In the said paragraphs, the Deponent avers that the Deceased husband Foday Lamin Tarawallie orally told her that the property

RULING SMK/cK | 3

“ — loz— in dispute would be allocated to the First Applicant and her whilst the first wife, Nana Tarawallie would be ailocated the property at Wilkinson Road.

7 She also avers that she jointly built the four shop apartment with her husband between 2002 and 2003 and after his demise in 2007 she built the three shop premises and a store on the upper floor of the said property. She also avers that it was while the application for a stay of execution was pending before Kamanda J that the Applicants ere ‘evicted from the premises in dispute. a

7. Itis also averred that the 2 Applicant indy aftidaiit. sworn thaishe had been leaving on the said property for the lastfifteer fore her eviction which has occasioned col on her family since the property was the source offiégme for Rex and theM&A pplicant who is a minor.

8. In his oral submission@\ S Marah Esq @maphasives on the issues averred in the affidavit in support &iRbrestated the maflers referred to in the foregoing paragraph as SpecidhCircumistinces. Hptites the AFRICANA TOKEH case and reli¢s(@h, Rules 28'ahd 64 of M¥Court of Appeal Rules, 1985.

9. In opposing tA pplicati9h, M. P. Fofanah Esq. for the Respondent relies oft the'afiidavit oRQoric Kamara sworn to on the 12" November, 2019.

i bye dh affidavit, Sorie Kamara refers to himself as the Lawful Atorney

for’ FRespondén herein, Dr Sahr Bannie Marah. He exhibits Exhibit A-

True copyagthe Respondent's Title Deeds. The last Will of the late Foday

Lamin Tarawally which under Clause 19 left the property in dispute to his

only widow, Mrs. Nana ‘Tarawally through whom he acquired title to the

premises- Exhibits Band C. the purported Deed of Gilt used by the 2"

a Applicant - Exhibit “E” and purported Letters of Administration and Vesting Deed issue to the 2" Applicant-exhidit A'S respectively.

RULING SmaKycK | 4

The pages read for this report end here. The judgment continues in the PDF.