AUTO PLAZA LIMITED VS CO ODUM TRADE INVESTMENT LTD
2016
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
- HER LADYSHIP JUSTICE SOPHIA ROSETTA BERNASKO ESSAH (MRS.)
Areas of Law
- Contract Law
- Evidence Law
- Commercial Law
2016
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
Plaintiff sued Defendant to recover USD 44,471.16 for unpaid credit on two Hyundai buses sold. Defendant counterclaimed for receipts and ownership transfer for seven vehicles asserted to have been paid for. The court found Defendant indebted for USD 39,000 excluding interest and ruled Plaintiff must provide receipts. The court denied Defendant's claim for ownership transfer due to lack of full payment. Judgment included interest at the prevailing bank rate and legal costs to Plaintiff.
Plaintiff herein commenced the instant action against the Defendant seeking thefollowing reliefs: a. An order for the recovery of an amount of USD 44, 471. 16. b. Interest on the said amount from the 1st day of August 2012 till date of final paymentc.
Costs d. Legal costs Plaintiff is a company dealing in cars and spare parts and servicing of same.
Defendant is a customer of Plaintiff.
It is Plaintiff’s case that Defendant purchased two Hyundai Country buses fromthe Plaintiff at a total cost of US100, 000 on credit basis.
That Plaintiff hadstipulated within the contract signed with Defendant on the 22nd of May 2010 thatfailure to pay the credit facility will attract a debit of an interest of 5% per month(compounded) until payment in full is received.
That Defendant failed to make any further payments after payment of US$61, 000they therefore approached the Plaintiff for rescheduling of the outstandingamount and made several promises to make good the payments but failed tohonour same.
Plaintiff therefore wrote to Defendant notifying them of their indebtedness butDefendant failed to heed.
That Defendants are not willing to pay and will not payuntil compelled by the court to do same.
Hence the instant action.
In their defence Defendants averred that they purchased seven vehicles fromPlaintiff and paid for them but Plaintiff refused to issue receipts for the payment.
That Plaintiff refused to effect transfer of owner ship of the vehicles to Defendantdespite several demands for same.
That Plaintiff also sold an additional bus to Defendant for which they have paidleaving a balance of US36, 000, however despite several requests to Plaintiffs forissuance of payment receipts and also to effect transfer of ownership Plaintiff hasrefused same.
That on 5th October 2012 one Caleb Kofie a salesman in the Plaintiff companytook an amount of GH¢500. 00 by cheque from the Defendant to effect thetransfer of ownership but has failed to do so.
They counter-claimed for an order directed at Plaintiff to issue receipts for thepayments made by Defendant and an order compelling the Plaintiff to effect thechange of ownership on all the seven vehicles Defendant has paid for.
Plaintiff joined issue generally with the Defendant.
According to them copies of statements of accounts have been given to theDefendant and so it is not true that receipts have not been issued to Defendant.
That the only reason why ownership of the two vehicles purchased personally byDefendant on