OMEGA PARTNERS LIMITED vs DATABANK ASSETS MGT. SERVICES LIMITED & ANOTHER

MOTION ON NOTICE FOR STAY OF EXECUTION PENDING APPEAL

This is a ruling on a motion on notice for stay of execution pending appeal. This was filed on behalf of Applicants on 18th October 2022.

I have read through the Motion Paper, Affidavit in Support and its attached Exhibits.

I have also read through the Affidavit in Opposition and its attached Exhibits.

The Court has also given careful consideration to the written submissions filed on behalf of Applicants and the Judgment Creditor Respondent in support of and in opposition to the instant application.

From a careful study of the Grounds of Appeal indicated in the Notice of Appeal (Exhibit B), the said grounds were comprehensively discussed and analyzed according to law based on the affidavit evidence in the ruling in respect of the Motion on Notice to set aside the Execution of the Judgment of this Court. This is the ruling of the court that has resulted in the instant application.

It is not in dispute that Applicants offered land worth Two Million, Four Hundred Thousand Ghana Cedis (USD2,400,000.00) as their contribution to the construction of the residential apartments whilst the Judgment Debtor made an equal contribution in cash.

Thus, entitling the Judgment Debtor to half the total number of the residential apartments built which are 32 in all. The Judgment Debtor is therefore entitled to 16 of the said residential apartments.

It is six of these sixteen apartments which the Judgment Debtor is entitled to that the Judgment Creditor has attached in the execution of the Consent Judgment of the Court.

In the ruling being appealed against, this Court after analysing the affidavit evidence took the view that neither Applicants nor the Judgment Debtor could provide evidence to the effect that Applicants had identified and chosen the Mahogany apartments from the Development Plan or any Agreement that predated the commencement of this action and the execution of the Consent Judgment by the Judgment Debtor and the Judgment Creditor.

The Court in the said ruling stated that neither Applicants nor Sophia Obeng Aboagye, alleged to be a Director of the Judgment Debtor Company by their respective affidavit evidence could convince the Court with the requisite degree of proof that the six apartments in the Mahogany blocks that had been attached had been identified and segregated exclusively for Applicants.

The reason this Court gave was that had that been so, Applicants would have made that claim in the Int