Try asking the following...
JUDGMENT
JUDGMENT
This is a landlord-tenant matter instituted by the Plaintiff on the 9th of December, 2022
claiming the following reliefs:
a) Rent arrears of GH₵4,200.00 i.e. GH₵600 per month for seven (7) months.
b) An Order to compel the defendants to return the plaintiff’s keys
c) Water bill arrears of GH₵250
d) Further orders for the defendants to accompany the plaintiff to inspect facilities in the
house.
When the matter came up for trial on the 10th of May, 2022, the defendants failed to
appear in court. The court proceeded to hear the matter under Order 25 r 1 (2) of CI 59.
Order 25 rule 1(2) of the District Court Rules, 2019 (C. I. 59), provides that
“where an action is called for trial and a party fails to attend the trial the Magistrate may
where the Plaintiff attends and the Defendant fails to attend, dismiss the counterclaim, if
any, and allow the Plaintiff to prove the claim”
There was proof of service of the writ of summons and hearing notice on the
Defendants dated the 25th of April, 2022. It is trite learning that a party who fails to
appear in court after due service on him is taken to have deliberately failed to take
advantage of the opportunity to be heard. In such a situation, the audi alteram partem
rule cannot be said to have been breached.
BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE
Plaintiff is the landlord of House Number PT 90 situate at Pariscoa. Plaintiff rented one
apartment in the said house to Defendants sometime in 2021. The Defendant lived in
the said apartment for almost two years. They have vacated the said premises since
October 2022 and have refused to hand over the keys to the said apartment to Plaintiff.
They have also refused to pay rent for seven months leading to rent arrears of
GHc4,200. They also owe water bill arrears of GHc250. All efforts to get the defendants
to pay up the amount they owe have been futile, hence this action.
At the end of the trial, the issue that arose for determination was whether or not
Plaintiff is entitled to his claim set out in the writ
To prove his case as required under sections 11, 12 and 14 of the Evidence Act, 19 75
(Act 323), the Plaintiff testified that the Defendants are a married couple and they were
tenants in one of his blocks of apartments at Pariscoa. A tenancy agreement was
executed between the parties sometime in June 2020. The Plaintiff tendered as Exhibit
A, a copy of the tenancy agreement. The rent payable per month was GH₵600 and it
was for an initial period of