87 Commissioners of the NEC and had announced an appeal therefrom, they had determined to abandon the appeal. This Court has said on multiple occasions that where a party announces an appeal from a decision of a lower tribunal and does not take the necessary steps to perfect the appeal, especially as in the instant case, the first step towards pursuit of the appeal, the appeal is deemed to have been abandoned and the tribunal that had entered the ruling or judgment is clothed with the authority and at the instance of the adversary party, to dismiss the appeal announced by the appealing party. Abdullah M. Housseine and Zeinah Housseine v. Abraham Kaydea, Supreme Court Opinion, March Term, 2012. In such a case, said final ruling or judgment is enforceable against the party abandoning the appeal. Blamo et al. v. Catholic Relief Services, Supreme Court Opinion, October Term, 2006. We hold therefore that the Board of Commissioners was the proper forum before whom a motion should or could have been filed for the dismissal of the appeal by the candidates seeking election to the House of Representative on the ticket of the Liberty Party on account of their failure to present to the Board of Commissioners a bill of exceptions for the approval of the members of the Board. Firestone Plantations Company v. Kollie, 42 LLR 159 (2004) Hence, this Court is the wrong and inappropriate forum before whom the motion to dismiss the appeal could or should have been filed. This Court has made identical pronouncements in other cases which, although not related to elections matters, operate under the same governing principles when it comes to appeals. Chris Toe v. FrontPage Africa, Supreme Court Opinion, March Term, 2013. We must emphasize also that where any party to a case in the lower court and against whom a decision or judgment has been entered, along with other parties to the case, and an appeal has been announced from said decision or judgment, any of the parties who announced the appeal is not obligated to file a motion to be dropped from the appeal before they can abandon the appeal. Nor is the court required, on its own accord, to decide that a party who has not met the statutory requirements for pursuing the appeal taken should be dropped from the action. That authority, under the circumstances of the instant case, is not vested in the court or any other judicial or quasi-judicial tribunal. The law clearly sets out the course to be pursued, especially by the appellee, should the appellant not pursue or perfect the appeal announced and taken. As stated above, the only action that