The Accra Fast Track High Court has stayed the execution of the perpetual injunction imposed on 10 reverend ministers of the Apostles Revelation Church (ARS) to restrain them from interfering with the management of the church. The court's order followed an application for stay of execution of judgement pending appeal filed by the 10 defendants in the substantive matter. According to the court, after perusing the processes in the application and also listening to counsel for the parties, the available evidence indicated that there was a dispute about whether or not the applicants were duly served with the writ of summons. However, the court gave the applicants 14 days to pay a bond of GH¢5OO, which is to be paid by them within one month from September 7, 2010, if they had not already done so. The court on March 17, 2010 restrained the applicants from organising or interfering with the organisation of the 70th anniversary of the church in their own names or in the name of the "College of Apostles". The applicants are Rev Apostle Matthew Akunor, Rev Apostle A.N.Tehn-Addy, Rev Apostle C.M.K. Dovlo, Rev Apostle L.K.. Nutsuako, Rev Apostle C.K.Attipoe, Rev Apostle J.G.Fummey and Rev Apostle R.K. Akpenyo. The respondents are Benjamin Adika and Charles Kwame Dzidzorm Agbolosoo, both members of the church. In the substantive matter, the applicants, who are the defendants, never entered an appearance and the court slapped GH¢1,000 costs against them. The court ruled that the purported delegates conference of the ARS held on November 12, 2009, had been in breach of the church's constitution and was, therefore, null and void. Furthermore, it held that the defendants' "College of Apostles" had no constitutional mandate or authority to organise the celebration of the 70th anniversary of the church, among others. An affidavit in support of the motion and deposed to by Tehn-Addy, one of the applicants, said the respondents on December 18, 2009, caused a writ of summons to be issued against them but they were never served and neither did they have notice of the said action until they saw a publication on the subject matter in Daily Graphic dated April 23, 2010. The applicants said that by reason of the said publication, they caused a search to be conducted at the registry of the court, which gave conflicting affidavits deposed to by the bailiffs in one breath and a personal service on them in another. They said following that their solicitor filed a motion to set aside the default judgement entered against them on grounds that they did not have notice that there were any proceedings against them. But the court later dismissed their application, saying that they were duly served and that by virtue of an order of the court for the process to be served on them by substituted service proved that they had all travelled out of their respective stations. Dissatisfied with the court ruling, they filed an appeal against the judgement, which applicants had raised serious legal issues against and for which reason they took that instant action. Source: Daily Graphic