SAVANNAH FARMERS MARKETING v. SOLOMON OSSEI SARFO & ANOR
2015
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
- Her Ladyship Angelina Mensah-Homiah (Mrs.)
Areas of Law
- Contract Law
- Evidence Law
- Commercial Law
2015
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
The case involves a plaintiff company claiming an outstanding balance for white maize sold to the defendants. The defendants counterclaimed, alleging the maize was unwholesome and caused loss of poultry. Four issues were set for trial: wholesomeness of the maize, agreed price, claims' validity, and other related matters. After reviewing the evidence, the judge found for the plaintiff, awarding them the claimed amount plus interest and costs, and dismissed the defendants' counterclaims due to lack of credible evidence.
JUDGMENT
In this action, the Plaintiff, Savanna Farmers Marketing Company, is claiming an amount of GH¢ 74, 576.00 representing the outstanding balance of white maize sold to the Defendants. The Plaintiff described itself as a registered company engaged in the processing and marketing of cereals. The 2nd Defendant was described as a co-operative society engaged in the marketing of farm produce with the 1st Defendant as its director. These facts are not in dispute. In sum, the Plaintiff's case is that the 1st Defendant approached it in July 2013 and offered to buy white maize for and on behalf of the 2nd Defendant. Pursuant to an agreement between the parties, the Plaintiff was to supply 7800 mini bags (50kg) of white maize equivalent to 3000 (130 kg) bags to the Defendants. Out of this quantity, the Plaintiff supplied 6,120 mini bags on credit after an agent of the latter had inspected the same. Subsequently, the 1st Defendant raised concerns about the unwholesome nature of 140 bags which the parties deducted from the quantity supplied leaving a balance of 5, 980 mini bags equivalent to 2300 of the 130kg. It is also the Plaintiff's case that the parties renegotiated the price and it was reviewed downwards from GH¢ 65.00 per each 130 Kg bag to GH¢ 60.00 and for the 2300 bags, the Defendants were to pay GH¢ 138,000.00. The 1st Defendant is said to have executed two post dated cheques as part payment but one cheque was dishonoured leaving an unpaid balance of GH¢74, 576.00 which is still outstanding.
The case for the Defendants is that it was rather the Plaintiff Company which prevailed upon them to purchase the said maize and the same was eventually supplied to them. They denied the Plaintiff's assertion that their agent inspected the maize prior to delivery. It is also their case that the Plaintiff was aware that the maize sold to them were to be supplied to the World Food Programme (WFP).
However, the WFP rejected the consignment on the basis that they were unwholesome. The Defendants alleged that they sold the rejected consignment to poultry farmers but they also lost their birds because of the toxins in the maize. In short, they attributed their inability to pay the outstanding balance to the poor quality of the maize supplied to them by the Plaintiff. The quantum of indebtedness was also challenged on the basis that the two postdated cheques amounting to GH¢126,500.00 represented the full payment at the agreed price of GH¢ 55.00 per bag. Thus, after