IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE GAMBIA IN THE CADI APPEALS ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Page 4 of 8 It is interesting to note that prior to the filing of this suit, there was a similar suit with Case No. B001/1809/06 which was filed in the same court by one Mama Kabba Jawara one of the widows of the deceased person against Ebrima Jwara (the 1 st appellant herein) sometimes between April and June 2006 for distribution of same estate but the case was not pursued to conclusion by the said Mama Kabba due to her demise. The appellants as well as the respondents stated before the court that their late father Muhamadou Jawara, who passed away in October 2004, left the following estate and beneficiaries, to wit: The Estate: 1. Property at Tabokoto, 2. Property at Churchill Town Serekunda, 3. Property at Kanifing South, 4. Property at 7 Louvell Square Banjul, 5. Property at 16 Fitzerald Street Banjul and 6. A Toyota 4 Wheel Drive The Beneficiaries: (a) Mama Kabba Jawara – 1 st Widow (i) Musa Jawara (ii) Idrisa Jawara (iii) Ceesay Jawara (iv) Jainaba Jawara (v) Isatou Jawara (vi) Fatimata Jawara and (vii) Mohammed Jawara (alis Bature). This last one, according to them predeceased their late father in September 11, 2001 bombing of the World Trade Centre (WTC) in the USA. (b) Fatiamata Jawara – 2 nd widow (i) Ebrima Jawara (ii) Fatimata Jawara (iii) Mahmud Jawara (iv) Ali Jawara (v) Maryama Jawara (vi) Jatou Jawara (vii) Fatimata Jawara
Page 5 of 8 (viii) Amara Jawara (ix) Abubakar Jawara and (x) Amie Jawara They also informed the court that there is another beneficiary from the late‟s divorced wife called Majigi Tunkara by name: (xi) Safi Jawara The 1 st appellant in line with ground 1 of the grounds of appeal argued that he was not notified of any date of judgment despite the fact that he was the plaintiff before the lower court. That he got to know that judgment was delivered when some policemen came to seize and in fact seized from him the Toyota 4 wheel drive left by the deceased which he was using in solving the domestic problems of the beneficiaries. The appellant argued further that even the two properties in Tabokoto and Churchill Town; it was through KMC that he got to know that they were allocated to the respondents. He submitted further that all attempts to redress the lapses by convincing the lower court to have a second look at the irregularities were treated with contempt. This, he lamented further, informed his decision to appeal against the findings of the lower court to this panel. The 1 st appellant lastly submitted before us that he used to share the rents accruing from the landed properties of the deceased between all the beneficiaries after taking out what would suffice in solving the domestic problems of the household until in the last three years when the respondents herein refused to take their respective shares. That the respondents‟ shares so rejected were further expended on maintenance of the household. That within the three years that the respondents refused to take their respective shares, they personally collected rents totaling D72,000.00 from tenants in respect of two properties at Serekunda. He argued that some of his expenses were receipted for while others were not. The 2 nd appellant Mahmud Jawara adopted the arguments of the 1 st appellant and added that he used to be the intermediary through whom the respondents‟ shares were paid to them by the 1 st appellant except for the past three years when they refused to take it. The 2 nd respondent in her reaction to this ground of appeal, which argument the 1 st respondent equally adopted, maintained that the 1 st appellant, who was the plaintiff in the lower court has constantly refused to take service of the lower
Page 1 and 2: Page 1 of 8 IN THE HIGH COURT OF TH
Page 3: Page 3 of 8 Additionally, the lower
Page 7 and 8: Page 7 of 8 We have carefully gone

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE GAMBIA IN THE CADI APPEALS ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?