Purino v Aipal [2008] PGDC 91; DC789 (1 April 2008)

DC789

PAPUA NEW GUINEA
[DISTRICT COURT OF JUSTICE]

DCCi NO 2911 OF 2005

BETWEEN

KUKU PURINO
COMPLAINANT

AND

JOHN AIPAL
FIRST DEFENDANT

AND

DAKA PAWA
SECOND DEFENDANT

Port Moresby: C.BIDAR, PM:

2008: 20 March
2008: 1 April

District Court – Practice and Procedure – Application so set aside various ex-parte orders of the court

General Principles – District Court Act, section 25

Cases Cited

There are no cases cited in the judgment

Counsel

W. ‘Thomas for Applicant/Defendant
Respondent/Complainant in person

RULING

BIDAR, PM: On the 7 March 2008, John Aipal the applicant/defendant filed a Notice of Motion which seeks the following orders:

1. "That the Warrant of Arrest ordered by Port Moresby District Court on 28 February 2008, be set aside.
   
2. The ex-parte order obtained on 26 October 2007 be set aside.
   
3. The matter returns before the Court for full hearing of the substantive issues inter-parties once and for all.
   
4. Any further or other orders that the court deems fit."
   

2. To understand the orders sought it is necessary to state brief background to the proceedings.

3. Sometimes in 2002, John Aipal bought a property, which was a house at 9 mile settlement from Dawa Pawa, an Engan man for the sum of two Thousand Kina (K2, 000.00). As the National Election was approaching, he decided to go home. He made arrangement with a Chimbu man, by the name of Mondo, who lived nearly to look after his property. He handed the house keys to him, and told him take care of it and sell his property at Three Thousand Kina (K3, 000.00). If anyone was interested in buying the property, he should wait until John Aipal returned after the Elections. When the defendant returned after the Elections, he realised that the complainant was in possession of the property and was going to pay for it. He noticed that the tucker shop was demolished which was located at the front of the house. When the defendant asked the complainant for payment he kept promising to pay the following month. That continued for two (2) to three (3) years.

4. Defendant became frustrated he saw the settlement committee and police and they physically removed the complainant after giving him time to relocate himself.

5. Subsequently, the complainant instituted these proceedings against the defendant, John Aipal which resulted in various ex-parte orders made in favour of the complainant. Those early ex-parte orders were set-aside on application by the defendant.

6. The present application also seeks to set aside the latest ex-parte orders which I referred to earlier.

7. Upon reading the affidavit of the applicant (John Aipal) and listening to counsel, Mr. Thomas as well as the Respondent (Mr. Kuku Purino), the court is satisfied that the reasons advanced by the applicant, raise matters that should be properly dealt with inter-partes. The application is therefore granted.

8. The court makes the following orders:

1. The Warrant of Arrest ordered by this court on 28 February 2008, is set aside.
   
2. The ex-parte orders of this court dated 26 October 2007 is set aside.
   
3. The matter of complainant is re-instated and is adjourned for hearing inter-partes on the 8 April 2008 at 1:30pm.
   
4. Cost to be in the cause.
   

___________________________________________

W. Thomas Warner Shand Lawyers for the Applicant/Defendant
Respondent/Complainant appeared in person