The main question raised in this appeal is whether the Court of Appeal was right to have refused to grant the appellants leave to appeal and extension of time within which to appeal from the ruling of the trial court whereby it refused the 4th appellant’s application to be joined as intervener in the capacity as the 4th defendant, the trial court holding amongst others that it was not a necessary party.

At the hearing of the application before the Court of Appeal the learned counsel for the appellants withdrew the first prayer (on extension of time within which the intervener may apply for leave to appeal) and it was accordingly struck out.

After hearing arguments by counsel, the learned Judge refused the application. Dissasfied with the said ruling, the appellant filed this appeal.