This application brings into focus a rather interesting question of Joinder of a person interested in a matter as a respondent in an appeal in which the applicant did not participate in the proceedings at the lower court where it appears that it has sufficient interest in the matter (land) in respect of which an order of injunction is sought and the grant of which may cause the applicant untold hardship or financial detriment.

In order to appreciate the issues involved in this application, it is germane to give a brief account of what led to the present application. At the trial court, the plaintiffs sued the defendants claiming against them as endorsed in their amended writ of summons as follows:-

The trial court dismissed the plaintiffs' case in its entirety. The plaintiffs were dissatisfied with that judgment and have appealed to this court. An application was made to the lower court by the plaintiffs/appellants for an order of interim injunction pending the determination of the appeal lodged before this court. The application was heard and dismissed by the lower court as lacking in merit. The plaintiffs/appellants thereafter brought a further application to this court after their appeal has been lodged asking for an order of interim injunction restraining the defendants/respondents by themselves, their servants, workmen and agents, privies, assigns or any person(s) claiming through or by them or otherwise howsoever from entering the land in dispute or evicting, dispossessing the plaintiffs/applicants there from or alienating, harassing and/or disturbing the possession of the plaintiffs/ applicants or their tenants or in any way doing anything whatsoever on the land that will alter the status quo of the parties pending the determination of the appeal lodged before this honourable court by the plaintiffs/appellants/applicants from the judgment of the trial court.

Before the application could be heard, the applicant brought this application to be joined as a co-respondent to the appeal. It claimed to be a tenant of the defendants/respondents on record and that it was in actual physical occupation of the land in dispute and stood to suffer severe financial losses if an order of injunction sought by the appellants was granted.