|
PARTIES:-KOFI
TWENEBOAH-KODUAH representing
the Plaintiff – present.
COUNSEL :- MS. GWENDY BARNAMAN
for Plaintiff – present.
JUDGMENT
By writ issued in the registry
of this court the Plaintiff
claim against the Defendant as
follows: An order for the
recovery of the sum of
GH¢35,205.08 owed to Plaintiff
by Defendant as at July 2008.
ii)
Interest at the rate of 8% from
July 2008 until final payment.
iii)
An order for the recovery of the
vehicles, Toyota Corolla with
Registration Number GW.1557X
(2) Nissan Cab Pick Up with
Registration Number ER.5667X and
ER.5668X.
iv)
Any further order (s) as may be
proper or just in the
circumstances inclusive costs.
The writ was accompanied with a
statement of claim.
The Defendant entered a defence,
which was essentially evasive
for non disclosure of any denial
of the Plaintiff’s claim
specifically except a general
traverse that the Plaintiff is
not entitled to its claim.
In paragraph 11 of the
Defendant’s statement of
Defence, the Defendant averred
that “The Defendant says that
it will be proper for the matter
to go for mediation so
that the payment of the
loan facility will be
rescheduled”.
Significantly, the parties
failed to take advantage of the
pre trial procedure under the
rules of this court for which
would have given the Defendant
the opportunity to mediate to
have the loan facility
rescheduled. While that
averment appears to me to me to
be an admission of liability by
the Defendants, notices were
issued for evidence to be taken,
the pre trial having closed
without the parties reaching an
amicable settlement. Having
satisfied myself that due notice
was served on the Defendant
through his lawyers by affidavit
of service dated 9th
November 2009, the court
proceeded with the trial and
took evidence from one Nat
Johnson Dodoo who said he is a
Credit Manager of Plaintiff’s
Company. The witness tendered
Exhibits ‘A’ and ‘B’, ‘B1’ ‘C’
‘D’ and ‘E’ representing the
contracts entered into between
the Plaintiff and Defendant,
defendant’s statement of account
with the Plaintiff company as of
12th January 2010,
part payments made by the
defendant, default notice from
Plaintiff to Defendant, and a
report of valuation of vehicle
seized from the Defendant by the
Plaintiff sold to defray part of
Defendant’s indebtedness to the
Plaintiff.
I have examined the exhibits and
I find that the Plaintiff has
discharged its burden of proof
in accordance with the standard
prescribed by law as provided
under sections 11, 12 and 14 of
the Evidence Act 1975 NRCD 323.
Since the Defendant has failed
to attend the trial to challenge
the Plaintiff’s evidence I shall
enter judgment for the Plaintiff
on the unchallenged evidence, of
the Plaintiff is witness, which
I hereby do by ordering as
follows:
1)
Final Judgment is entered for
the Plaintiff for all the
relief’s endorsed on the writ
except the recovery of Toyota
Corolla with Reg. No. GW.1557X
which had already been seized by
the Plaintiff prior to the
trial.
2)
I award costs in favour of the
Plaintiff assessed at GH¢5,000.00
against the Defendant.
(SGD.)
ALHAJI I. O. TANKO AMADU
JUSTICE OF
THE HIGH COURT
|
