|
JUDGMENT
On the 29th October
2008, I ordered interlocutory
judgment in favour of the
Plaintiffs and adjourned this
case for the Plaintiffs to
adduce evidence in support of
their claims against the
Defendants who have failed to
enter appearance to the writ
served on them. On the 4th
November 2008 the 1st
Plaintiff gave evidence in proof
of their claims. She tendered
in evidence a contract dated 2nd
May 2007 between her and the 2nd
Plaintiff on one part and the
Defendant on the other part,
which was admitted and marked
Exhibit ‘A’. She also tendered
a photocopy of a receipt
evidencing payment by the
Plaintiffs of the sum of
¢415,350,000.00 to the Defendant
as part payment of a 4 bedroom
storey building to be
constructed for the Plaintiffs
as envisaged under the terms of
contract Exhibit ‘A’. The
receipt is marked Exhibit ‘B’.
She further tendered a payment
structure marked Exhibit ‘C' in
which payment has been scheduled
by the Defendant’s
Chief Executive Officer on
subsequent payments to be made
by the Plaintiffs in
consideration for the 4 bedroom
storey building.
Notwithstanding all these acts
of the Plaintiffs, the Defendant
has failed to discharge its
obligations under the contract
Exhibit ‘A’. The Plaintiff has
commenced this action seeking an
order for specific performance,
special damages and costs,
including litigation expenses
and Solicitors professional fees
against the Defendant.
In the case of LARTEY Vs.
BANNERMA
(1972) 2GLR 438 Sorkodie J. of
(blessed memory)
stated succinctly the rationale
for granting the equitable
remedy of specific performance
as follows:
“Specific
performance is an equitable
remedy generally granted to
enforce against a defendant the
duty of doing what he agreed by
consent to do provided the
contract is valid in form and
has been made between competent
parties and is unobjectionable
in its nature”
I have no doubt whatsoever that
the evidence adduced by the
Plaintiff entitles them to the
reliefs they seek in this suit,
for it would amount to grave
injustice if the Defendants were
to be allowed to depart on their
obligations having received
substantial consideration form
the Plaintiffs. The Plaintiffs
having established facts
amounting to substantial part
performance to their detriment
in pursuance of the contract
between them and the Defendants,
I hereby enter final judgment
for the Plaintiffs and grant the
reliefs sought in this suit as
follows.
An order for
specific performance against the
Defendant with respect to the
contract for the construction of
the 4 bedroom storey building at
Ajirigano, East Legon described
in the Defendant’s offer letter
with Reference No. EXTEEM/M
13/08 as “Royal Prestige”.
i
award the Plaintiffs special
damages of $250 or its cedi
equivalent per month from
January 2008 until the
Defendants deliver for the
ownership and use of the
Plaintiffs, the property
described above. The costs of
the action are assessed at GH¢3,000
in favour of the Plaintiffs.
Ordered accordingly.
(SGD.)
JUSTICE I. O.
TANKO AMADU
JUSTICE OF THE HIGH COURT
|
