ENOCH YEBOAH AGYEPONG VS PREMIUM MOTORS LTD

On the 7th of March, 2023 the Plaintiff/Applicant (Plaintiff) commenced the instant suit against the Defendant/ Respondent (Respondent) for;

1. A declaration that the Defendant’s continuous detention of his vehicle and refusal to release same to Plaintiff despite Plaintiff fully paying for its cost of repairs and demanding same to be released constitutes an illegality.

2. An Order for the Defendant to immediately release to Plaintiff the said vehicle

3. An order for the Plaintiff to recover general and special damages from the Defendant for losses incurred by the Plaintiff for Defendant’s continuous detention of his vehicle after its repairs and despite his demands for same to be released .

4. Costs

Following this, Plaintiff filed the instant Motion for an Order of Mandatory Injunction compelling Defendant to release Plaintiff’s vehicle pursuant to Order 25 rule 1 of the High Court Civil Procedure Rules, 2004 (CI47).

The Defendant in its Statement of Defence resisted the Plaintiff’s claim and counterclaimed for inter alia;

a. Payment of storage /parking fees at Thirty Ghana Cedis (GH¢30.00.) per day from 1st March, 2020 till 16th September, 2022

b. Payment of storage /parking fees at Thirty Ghana Cedis (GH¢30.00.) per day from 6th November, 2022 till date of final payment.

c. Interest on the sum contained in clause 24.a. at the commercial bank rate

I have read the pleadings and the affidavits filed by the parties. It is trite learning that an injunction such as the present, is not granted as a matter of course. Even though a discretionary remedy, it is granted according to precedent and well settled principles.

Order 25 rule 1 provides an injunction be granted only in cases where the Court considers same to be just or convenient. This has been defined in the case of EKWAM V PIANIM (No 1) [1997-1998] SCGLR 117, to mean just as well as convenient.

Having examined the papers on record I am of the considered opinion that the Plaintiff’s case is not frivolous. I find that there are serious questions to be tried in this suit. These questions include whether the Plaintiff is truly and justly indebted to the Defendant. I am also of the opinion that, the refusal of the application will result in hardship to the Plaintiff, which in the long run cannot be compensated for by damages or costs.

However, the rights and interests of the Plaintiff should be balanced against those of the Defendant whose case is that it is entitled to a lien on the Plainti