AMTAN (GH) LTD AND ANOTHER vs. GHANA COMMERCIAL BANK [2000]DLHC1162

Date	2000-07-21
Suit No.
Citation No.	[2000]DLHC1162

APPAU J

SAMUEL ASAMOAH FOR THE APPLICANTS.

ANTHONY W ESSIEDU FOR THE RESPONDENTS.

<p class="mb-5" id="contentDlCitation"  hidden>[2000]DLHC1162</p>
																																						<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" ><span style="font-size: 18px !important;"><span style="font-size: 18px !important;"><p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="margin-bottom:5.0pt;text-align:center;
mso-pagination:none;border:none;mso-padding-alt:31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt;
mso-border-shadow:yes"><b><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;
mso-fareast-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;
color:#00B0F0">AMTAN (GH) LTD AND ANOTHER<o:p></o:p></span></b></p><p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="margin-bottom:5.0pt;text-align:center;
mso-pagination:none;border:none;mso-padding-alt:31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt;
mso-border-shadow:yes"><b><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;
mso-fareast-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;
color:#00B0F0">vs.<o:p></o:p></span></b></p><p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="margin-bottom:5.0pt;text-align:center;
mso-pagination:none;border:none;mso-padding-alt:31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt;
mso-border-shadow:yes"><b><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;
mso-fareast-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;
color:#00B0F0">GHANA COMMERCIAL BANK<o:p></o:p></span></b></p><p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="margin-bottom:5.0pt;text-align:center;
mso-pagination:none;border:none;mso-padding-alt:31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt;
mso-border-shadow:yes"><b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;
mso-fareast-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;">[HIGH
COURT, ACCRA]<o:p></o:p></span></b></p><p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="margin-bottom:5.0pt;text-align:center;
mso-pagination:none;border:none;mso-padding-alt:31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt;
mso-border-shadow:yes"><b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;
mso-fareast-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;">[2001-2002]
1 GLR 495<o:p></o:p></span></b></p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">

</div><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:5.0pt;text-align:justify;mso-pagination:
none;border:none;mso-padding-alt:31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt;mso-border-shadow:
yes"><b><span style="font-size:12.0pt;
line-height:115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;mso-fareast-font-family:
&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;">COUNSEL:<o:p></o:p></span></b></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:5.0pt;text-align:justify;mso-pagination:
none;border:none;mso-padding-alt:31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt;mso-border-shadow:
yes"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;
mso-fareast-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;">SAMUEL
ASAMOAH FOR THE APPLICANTS.<o:p></o:p></span></p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">

<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:5.0pt;mso-pagination:none;border:none;
mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;padding:0in;mso-padding-alt:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;
mso-fareast-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;">ANTHONY
W ESSIEDU FOR THE RESPONDENTS.<b><u> <o:p></o:p></u></b></span></p>

</div><p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="margin-bottom:5.0pt;text-align:center;
mso-pagination:none;border:none;mso-padding-alt:31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt;
mso-border-shadow:yes"><b><u><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;
mso-fareast-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;">JUDGEMENT<o:p></o:p></span></u></b></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:5.0pt;text-align:justify;mso-pagination:
none;border:none;mso-padding-alt:31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt;mso-border-shadow:
yes"><b><span style="font-size:12.0pt;
line-height:115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;mso-fareast-font-family:
&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;">Appau J. <o:p></o:p></span></b></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:5.0pt;text-align:justify;mso-pagination:
none;border:none;mso-padding-alt:31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt;mso-border-shadow:
yes"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;
mso-fareast-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;">The
defendants-judgment debtors-applicants (hereinafter referred to as the
applicants) are praying this court to grant them leave to pay an outstanding
judgment debt owed to the plaintiff-judgment-creditor-respondents (hereinafter
referred to as the respondents) on instalment basis. The judgment debt has been
outstanding for the past two years and over. The applicants’ application which
was supported by three separate affidavits was strongly opposed by the
respondents in a detailed affidavit in opposition filed on 24 September 1999.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:5.0pt;text-align:justify;mso-pagination:
none;border:none;mso-padding-alt:31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt;mso-border-shadow:
yes"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;
mso-fareast-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;">In
their first affidavit in support of the application filed on 5 August 1999, the
applicants indicated that though they were granted a similar order by this
court in March 1999 to pay the same judgment debt on instalment basis they could
not fully comply with the said order as a result of certain constraints.
According to them, the respondents obtained judgment against them on 16
November 1998 in the sum of ¢441,004,931.57 with interest on same at a rate of
40 per cent from 1 October 1997 till the date of final payment plus costs of
¢20 million. After making some part payment, the court granted them an order to
pay the remaining judgment debt and interest on monthly instalment basis of ¢60
million, beginning from 31 March 1999 for eight successive months, ie ending in
November 1999. However, they could not honour the terms of payment due to
financial constraints as their business slumped. They were therefore praying
the court to give them another chance or opportunity to pay the remaining
judgment debt at ¢50 million every quarter or three months. The applicants’
application was prompted by a writ of fi.fa issued against them by the
respondents for the attachment and sale of the applicants’ movable and
immovable properties in satisfaction of the judgment debt and interest which
was then running around ¢600 million at the time when the applicants defaulted
under the first terms of payment.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:5.0pt;text-align:justify;mso-pagination:
none;border:none;mso-padding-alt:31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt;mso-border-shadow:
yes"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;
mso-fareast-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;">In
their affidavit filed on 24 September 1999 in opposition to the application,
the respondents gave a historical account of the whole case before the court to
establish that the applicants had on previous occasions not kept faith with the
court and therefore could not be trusted anymore. According to the respondents,
and as was admitted by the applicants in their own application, the applicants
were granted a similar opportunity on 3 March 1999 but failed to honour the
terms of payment. They were therefore compelled to go into execution as ordered
by the court by attaching the properties of the applicants to be sold to defray
the judgment debt. The said properties were accordingly valued by the
Architectural and Engineering Services Ltd (AESL) and when they brought in an
application for a reserved price to be placed on the properties by the court
before the items could be auctioned or sold, the applicants raised an objection
to the valuation report and suggested that they should also be made to submit a
counter valuation report. That was on 19 July 1999. The court granted their
prayer but after about four successive adjournments, the applicants could not
submit the counter valuation report. Thereafter, ie from 4 August 1999, the
docket in the case got missing from the registry of the court and up to date it
has not been traced. The present docket before the court was therefore a
duplicate docket built or assembled by the registry of the court with the
assistance of the respondents’ solicitor. The respondents contended that the
present application before the court is an abuse of the court’s process, the
applicants having had the benefit of a similar application before the court
which they could not honour.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:5.0pt;text-align:justify;mso-pagination:
none;border:none;mso-padding-alt:31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt;mso-border-shadow:
yes"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;
mso-fareast-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;">After
the applicants had been served with the respondents’ affidavit in opposition,
they (the applicants) filed two further or supplementary affidavits in support
on 11 May 2000 and 30 May 2000, not denying the depositions contained in the
affidavit in opposition but enhancing the terms of payment suggested in their
affidavit in support. In the first affidavit in support filed on 5 Augus</main>