CHRIS EKE MIKE LTD VS CHRISTOPHER EKE UWAKA & ORS
2019
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
- HIS LORDSHIP, JUSTICE NICHOLAS M. C. ABODAKPI (J)
Areas of Law
- Civil Procedure
- Contract Law
2019
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
The case involves a contractual dispute between the Plaintiff and the 1st Defendant. The Court heard a motion supported by two affidavits from the Plaintiff. Evidence showed that the 1st Defendant was served with a Writ of Summons on 25th September, 2019, through an order of substituted service granted on 20th September, 2019. The 1st Defendant failed to file a Notice of Appearance within the required 8-day period. The Court determined that the 1st Defendant was duly served and that the nature of the dispute was contractual, involving a liquidated amount deposited in the 1st Defendant's account. Based on these findings, the Court entered a final judgment in favor of the Plaintiff against the 1st Defendant for the relief sought, without requiring further oral evidence. The Court also awarded costs of GH¢5,000.00 to the Plaintiff.
BY COURT: JUDGMENT (FINAL)1. This Court has heard the motion, there are two affidavits in support.
The affidavit in support and a supplementary affidavit.
There Exhibit ‘A’ a search Report which showed that 1st Defendant has been served with the Writ of Summons on 25th September, 2019 but has failed to file a Notice of Appearance as required by the rules of Court.
The proof of service which has been annexed as Exhibit ‘B’ to the supplementary affidavit showed that 1st Defendant has been duly served as alleged.
Exhibit ‘B’ is an order of substituted service granted by this Court on 20th September, 2019 with a period of seven (7) days of posting which has long lapsed.
This evidence [exhibit B] is not only prima facie evidence that 1st Defendant has been duly served, but this taken together with the deposition in support I hold conclusively that 1st Defendant has been duly served.
The 1st Defendant has failed or neglected to file a notice of appearance within 8 days as required by the rules of this Court.
The nature of relationship between Plaintiff and 1st Defendant and the 2nd Defendant is a contractual one.
The allegation that money has been paid into 1st Defendant’s account has been established.
The reliefs indorsed appear to be liquidated in nature, because this dispute arose from a contractual relationship.
That amount deposited in 1st Defendant accounts which is readily veritable is an amount that Plaintiff is entitled to without any further proof by way of viva voce evidence.
Consequently I enter final Judgment in favour of Plaintiff against the 1st Defendant in respect of relief 1. 2. Costs of GH¢5, 000. 00 is awarded in Plaintiff’s favour and against the 1st Defendant
(SGD)H/L NICHOLAS M. C. ABODAKPI JUSTICE OF THE HIGH COURT.