BERNARD DANKWA VS NANA AFRAKOMA PREMPEH & ANOR
2016
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
- HER LADYSHIP JUSTICE JANAPARE A. BARTELS- KODWO (MRS.)
Areas of Law
- Contract Law
- Evidence Law
2016
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
The Plaintiff sold a Mercedes Benz to the 1st Defendant who, along with her ex-husband, paid $19,000 out of the $25,000 purchase price, leaving a $6,000 balance. The Plaintiff sought to recover this balance, claiming the 1st Defendant later took ownership and sold the car without consent. The 1st Defendant contended the vehicle was sold to the 2nd Defendant company. The court found the 1st Defendant liable for the unpaid balance, determining the Plaintiff had sold the car to her and her husband, not to the 2nd Defendant. The court awarded the Plaintiff $6,000 plus interest and costs.
By an amended Writ of Summons and Statement of Claim the Plaintiff brought this action against the Defendants making a claim for: a. An order for the recovery of Six Thousand US Dollars (US$6, 000. 00) or its Cedi equivalent being the outstanding balance of the cost of the Mercedes Benz vehicle sold on credit by the Plaintiff to the 1st Defendant who transferred same to 2nd Defendant.
b. Interest on the said Six Thousand US Dollars (US$6, 000. 00) at the prevailing bank rate from December 2008 up to the date of final payment.
c. Cost. Per the depositions in the amended statement of claim pursuant to the Order of this Court dated 4th February 2015, the Plaintiff, a business man avers he sold the Benz vehicle in dispute to the first defendant who was then married to her former husband for Twenty Five Thousand Dollars(US$25, 000. 00) on credit.
Both she and her former husband made payments totaling Nineteen Thousand US Dollars (US$19, 000. 00) leaving a balance of Six Thousand US Dollars US$6, 000. 00. Upon the dissolution of their marriage the 1st Defendant claimed ownership of the vehicle and promised to pay the balance directly to the Plaintiff.
She then offered to pay off the balance with an offer of a piece of land which did not work out.
Eventually she told him she was unwilling to pay it off due to the alimony she received from her husband.
According to the Plaintiff’s averments he offered to refund the amount paid to her if she would return the vehicle but she refused the offer and sold the vehicle off to a third party without Plaintiff’s consent.
She then changed her story saying the Plaintiff had sold the vehicle to the second defendant so any amount due to the Plaintiff should be recovered from the 2nd Defendant.
Plaintiff contends he dealt with the 1st defendant.
So any purported transfer of title in the vehicle to the 2nd defendant must have been orchestrated by the 1st defendant who in applying to have the 2nd defendant joined to the suit, attached a document of transfer purporting to have been signed by him (Plaintiff) transferring title in the vehicle in dispute to the 2nd defendant.
This document he avers, only came to his attention when the 1st defendant sought to have the 2nd defendant joined to the suit.
He denies that it is his deed and contends that either the 1st defendant fraudulently prepared same or fraudulently caused it to be prepared.
Never did he consent to any such transfer and that she caused it to be purportedly si