GH - MRS. COMFORT PRAH v. BAFLA LTD

J U D G E M E N T

The plaintiff by her writ filed on 17th April 2008 claimed from the defendant the following:

An order terminating the tenancy agreement dated 25th August 2004 on the grounds of breach of covenants.

An order compelling the defendant to restore the structure and economic value of the premises and put same in tenantable state or condition.

Alternatively an order to compel the defendant to pay for an agreed estimated cost of carrying out relief (b) supra.

Recovery of fifty five million cedis (55,000,000.00 cedis) being eleven (11) months arrears of rent.

Interest on the said arrears at current bank rate.

Recovery of possession and ejectment

Mesne profits.

Costs

Any other relief(s) or order(s) as to the Honourable Court may seem meet.

The writ was accompanied by a statement of claim in which the plaintiff claimed that the tenancy of house number 13, Kofi Dzata Street, Dzorwulu Residential Area, Accra by the defendant from her is governed by a tenancy agreement dated 25th August 2004. The agreed rent was GHc500.00 a month. The plaintiff also pleaded that at the commencement of the suit; the defendant was in 11 months arrears totalling GHc5500.00 and had refused to pay despite repeated demand. The plaintiff also pleaded further that the defendant had caused massive destruction to the property and by this changed the structure and the economic value of the premises and breached clauses 2a, c, d, f, j and 4a of the tenancy agreement.

The defendant entered appearance and filed a defence and counter- claim on 4-6-2008 but was subsequently amended and filed amended defence on 11-11-2008.

In the defence, the defendant admitted that the house in issue has been rented to the defendant company and that there is a tenancy agreement dated 25th August 2004. The defendant however pleaded that it was agreed between them that substantial structural change was to be effected on the property by the defendant at his own expense, to suit his taste. As a result of the renovations the defendant was given 3 months rent free.

The defendant pleaded further that he re- roofed the house completely and commenced structural changes as well as began the excavation for a storey building in the open compound but in the middle of the renovation, he was stopped by the successor, the plaintiff and her step-son, who had come from London on the ground that the plaintiff had no authority to rent out the property. That it was after the funeral of the deceased and resol