KENT INT LUBRICANT INDUSTRY LTD. vs TEMA GULF TRADING LTD. & ANOR
2016
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
- HER LADYSHIP JUSTICE JANAPARE BARTELS-KODWO (MRS.)
Areas of Law
- Civil Procedure
- Corporate Law
2016
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
The case involved an interpleader action about ownership of properties attached in execution of a judgment debt. The Claimant Company asserted ownership over certain goods, supported by receipts and incorporation documents. The Plaintiff/Judgment/Creditor contested, claiming fraud, as the Claimant's incorporation occurred post-judgment. The court found inconsistencies in the Claimant’s documents, implying bad faith to avoid the debt. The claim was dismissed with costs.
This Interpleader action came up when the immoveable properties of the Defendant/Judgment/Debtor in this suit had been attached in execution of its Judgment Debt.
The Claimant Company filed a Notice of Claim which was disputed by the Plaintiff/Judgment/Creditor.
Thereafter the Claimant filed an affidavit of Interest which the Plaintiff/Judgment/Creditor responded to with an affidavit of Dispute.
Based upon the processes filed and the attached documents, the Court ordered the parties to file written submissions in order to dispose of the matter summarily.
At the return date however, only the Plaintiff filed written submissions therefore the Court relies on the Claimant’s affidavit of interest in disposing of this matter.
It is the Claimant’s case that the following movable properties under attachment by the Deputy Sheriff belong to it and these are:
a) 13 pieces of Magic TAB 12V (225 Ah) Untested Batteries
b) 132 Gallons of German Power (Diesel Engine Oil)
c) 15 pieces of Varta Untested Batteries
d) 2 pieces of Solar Panels
e) 20 pieces of Varta Brown Batteries
f) 1piece of Tab Flooded (119 Ah).
In support of its assertion that it owns the goods the Claimant attached to its affidavit, copies of the receipts of payments and waybills covering the moveable properties as Exhibit “BZ4”. Furthermore it attached Exhibit “BZ5”, a copy of the Special Resolution of the Defendant/Judgment/Debtor Company which ceased operations on 8th April, 2015had its name cancelled from the Register of Companies.
The Claimant contends that having had no business dealings with the Plaintiff/Judgment/Creditor it cannot make any legitimate claims or demands on it.
It provided Exhibit “BZ6” its document of Incorporation to show that it has a separate legal personality engaged in the business of things including general trading.
It therefore avers the attachment is wrong and prays the properties are released from the attachment.
The Counsel for Plaintiff/Judgment/Creditor reiterated the facts of this action in his submissions in support of his affidavit of Dispute by stating that the court on 18thFebruary 2015 entered Summary Judgment in their favour which read as follows; “The application for Summary Judgment is granted in part i. e. on the terms admitted enabling Plaintiff to have judgment entered in its favour in the sum of One Hundred Thousand United States Dollars [US$100, 000. 00) admitted by the Defendant.
Parties are to contest the balance.
Cost of Ten Thousand