K. T. ACKUN v. J. K. FRIMPONG AND THE UNITED AFRICA CO. (Produce Dept.)

Reasons for the Judgment delivered on 14th October, 1938:

In this case I have already given judgment for the plaintiff. I will now give my reasons.

The plaintiff who owns a leasehold property in Kumasi received a loan of £13 from the first defendant through his brother Sagoe. As security for this loan the lease was deposited with the first defendant. The plaintiff in due course settled this debt through Sagoe.

Sagoe applied to the first defendant for the return of the document. The first defendant said he had given the lease to a friend who was then out of town. In the meantime the 1st. defendant had told Sagoe that it was his intention to deposit the lease with the 2nd. defendants for business transaction and Sagoe advised him to see the plaintiff and obtain his consent. There was no evidence before me to show that this conversation was reported to the plaintiff.

Some time afterwards the plaintiff received a letter from the second defendants demanding the payment of the sum of £22716.9" " d. This letter is dated the 6th March, 1937 and it reads as follows:-

"Dear Sir, - Mr. J. K. O. Frimpong is owing this Department the sum of £227 16. 9d. and in accordance with the terms of your guarantee we beg to call upon you for the immediate payment of the sum of £22716.9" " d. failing payment by the 10 th instant we shall proceed to operate on the security in our possession to enforce collection."

On the receipt of this letter the plaintiff consulted a solicitor and a letter dated the 12 th March, 1937 was sent to the second defendants. The letter reads as follows:-

"Dear Sir, - My client Kwesi J. Ackun of Kumasi has instructed me to reply to your letter of the 6th March, 1937. My client is not aware of giving any guarantee to you for which he should become liable to your Department in the sum of £22716. 9d. owing by J. K. O. Frimpong. My client is of the opinion that there is a mistake and if you should operate upon any security of his in your possession you will be doing so at your own risk. I shall be glad therefore if you will be good enough to make the matter clearer."

In reply to the above letter the second defendants sent the following letter to the plaintiff's solicitor:-

"Dear Sir, - We are in receipt of yours of the 12th instant and in reply we beg to inform you that we have in our possession the lease between Government and your client together with a legal mortgage which he executed securing Mr. Frimpong as a Produce Buyer to this Department an