REAL ESTATE DEVELOPERS LTD. vs. FOSUA AND ANOTHER [1985]DLCA971

Date	1985-07-30
Suit No.
Citation No.	[1985]DLCA971

SOWAH J.S.C.

ABBAN JA

OSEI-HWERE J.A.

J. K. AGYEMANG FOR THE APPELLANTS.

NANA OTOAMFOM BEKOE (PETER A. ADJETEY) FOR THE RESPONDENTS.

[1985]DLCA971
																																						<div class="restriction-wrapper">
														<div class="container-lg">
															<div class="row">
																<div class="col-md-12 restricted-content">
																	<div class="restricted-content-img-wrapper">
																		<div class="lock-icon bounce-7">
																			<img class=""
																				src="https://www.dennislawgh.com/dl-assets/dl-images/lock-content.png"
																				alt="Subscription based content">
																		</div>
																	</div>
																	 
																		<a href="https://www.dennislawgh.com/login"
																		class="btn btn-primary btn-lg"
																		style="font-family: 'open sans'; text-transform: capitalize; border-radius: 8px"> 
																		Login to Read Full Case </a>
																	 
																	
																</div>
															</div>
														</div>
													</div>
													<main id="main" class="content" style="min-height: 60rem" ><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">

REAL ESTATE DEVELOPERS
LTD. <o:p></o:p>

{COURT OF APPEAL, ACCRA} <o:p></o:p>

[1984-86] 2 GLR 334<o:p></o:p>

DATE:
30 JULY 1985<o:p></o:p>

</div><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>COUNSEL:&nbsp;&nbsp; <o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in 0in 0in 0in">

J.
K. AGYEMANG FOR THE APPELLANTS. <o:p></o:p>

NANA
OTOAMFOM BEKOE (PETER A. ADJETEY) FOR THE RESPONDENTS.<o:p></o:p>

</div>CORAM:
<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in 0in 0in 0in">

SOWAH J.S.C., ABBAN AND OSEI-HWERE JJ.A.<o:p></o:p>

</div><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>JUDGMENT OF SOWAH J.S.C.<o:p></o:p>Sowah
J.S.C delivered the judgment of the court. The facts of this case are
uncomplicated and straightforward. The respondents (hereafter called the
plaintiffs) Madam Ama Fosua and her husband Kwaku Bo, also known by several
other names including Major K.K. Biney of the Ghana Army, are man and wife. And
the appellant company (hereafter called the defendant) is a real estate
developing company and operates under the name and style of Real Estate
Developers Ltd.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The
plaintiffs being desirous of acquiring housing properties approached the
managing director of the defendant company which was building houses in Tema.
The approach was made by Ama Fosua who from the evidence knew the defendant’s
managing director prior to the transaction which had brought the parties to
court.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The
plaintiffs both negotiated with the defendant’s managing director for the
purchase of a house each. Madam Ama Fosua paid the sum of ¢245,000 for her
house and the second plaintiff Kwaku Bo paid ¢255,000 for his. The houses were
uncompleted at the time but the plaintiffs were, according to the evidence,
obliged to pay the full purchase prices because of the representations made by
the defendant company’s managing director that the house to be purchased by
Madam Ama Fosua would be completed within three months and the other within six
months from the dates of payment.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The
receipt dated 22 November 1978, exhibit D, reads, “Received with thanks from
Madam Ama Fosua the sum of two hundred and forty-five thousand cedis being full
settlement of Plot No. 6 Home Type AT74...” Exhibit E is the agreement entered
into between the company and Madam Ama Fosua also on 22 November 1978. There
was a similar agreement between the defendant company and the second plaintiff,
Kwaku Bo (except for the price and time of completion) in identical terms vide
exhibits A and B. In the agreement with Kwaku Bo the period was six months
(subject to the general conditions of business thereto attached).<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The first
house by simple arithmetic ought to have been completed by 1 April 1979 and the
second by July 1979. On 29 October 1980 the plaintiffs in identical but
separate letters wrote to the defendant company inviting their attention to the
terms of the agreements. The defendant company reacted almost immediately. In
its reply dated 7 November 1980, exhibit 9, the company blamed the scarcity of
supply of building materials and inflation for the delay and warned that there
would be upward adjustments in the prices already agreed to. The plaintiffs
indicated in rejoinders that the contents of the letters of 7 November 1980
were unacceptable. Nevertheless on 6 February 198 the defendant company by
exhibits C3 and J communicated the final prices to the plaintiffs, i.e.
¢440,545 for each house less the sums paid by the plaintiffs. By 13 October
1983 the cost of the houses as per exhibit M had escalated to ¢750,000 each.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The
dispute finally found its way to the court. Two separate writs were issued
against the defendant; the first being writ No. 1694/81 in respect of Madam
Fosua and the other was suit</main>