In this case, the appellant brought this suit against the decision of the Chief magistrate, where it had been stated that the appellant was entitled to pay costs to the first and third respondents, before proceeding further with the case against the second respondent and his legal representative.
The appellant intended to withdraw the case against both the first and third respondents so that she could maintain the suit against the second respondent. The withdrawal was recorded and the trail magistrate ordered that she first pays costs to the first and third respondents.