In this case the plaintiff sues the defendant for ¢1,152 damages, being the prize, which, but for the defendant’s default, he would have been entitled to on certain lotto tickets.
The plaintiff, now a farmer at New Abudeasi, was then at Sunyani. The action arises on these facts: On 12 June 1974, the plaintiff bought from the defendant, as lotto receiver No. 1834 in Sunyani, three lotto tickets, Nos. 17, 81 and 69. At the draw in Accra on 15 June 1974, those three numbers were declared as having won each respectively a prize of ¢384. Those tickets Nos. 17, 81 and 69 were issued respectively from lotto booklets numbers NC.241/751766, NC.241/751768 and NC.241/751773. After the necessary processing procedures of the said winning tickets, at the headquarters in Accra, of the Department of National Lotteries, the plaintiff was given in return for the said three tickets acknowledgement vouchers, exhibits A-1-3.
However, in further pursuit of his prize the plaintiff was eventually met with the rude shock of being told that the Director of the Department of National Lotteries had declared the plaintiff’s winnings void. It was explained that the sale of the said tickets was irregular; it having been found that those three tickets were not authorised allocation to the defendant. According to the directors the three tickets, evidenced by exhibits A 1-3, had originally been issued to lotto seller No. 1258 in whose account the sale of A 1-3 had been properly acknowledged. It was the contention of the plaintiff that by the act of the defendant, in offering to him those tickets, he has suffered damage to the extent of the prize money of ¢1,152.
The defendant did not appear at the trial nor did her counsel. From her statement of defence, however, her stand may be summed up as follows: although she admits lotto receiver's number 1834 as hers, she denies selling any tickets from the aforesaid booklets; and in particular [p.313] Nos. 17, 81-69 to the plaintiff at all: or ever stamping the said tickets with her registration No. 1834. Her case was that the said lotto booklets NC.241/757166/68, NC.241/757168 NC.241/757173 were never issued to her by the director, nor did she ever act as agent of the receiver to whom those tickets officially allotted, who was revealed to be lotto receiver No. 1258. The defendant accounts for the presence of her registration stamp on the said three tickets to be the result of fraud or some error.
The material issues thus joined
