NTHC LIMITED vs. EAST DADEKOTOPON DEVELOPMENT TRUST AND 3 ORS. [2010]DLCA6589

Date	2010-10-21
Suit No.	CIVIL APPEAL SUIT NO: H1/216/06
Citation No.	[2010]DLCA6589

MARIAMA OWUSU J.A. (PRESIDING)

YAW-APPAU J.A.

MARFUL-SAU J.A.

MR. L. S. N. AKWETTEY FOR THE DEFENDANT/APPELLANTS

MR. G. A. SARPONG FOR THE PLAINTIFF/RESPONDENTS

[2010]DLCA6589
																																						<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" >NTHC LIMITED<o:p></o:p>(PLAINTIFF/APPELLANT/CROSS
RESPONDENTS)<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>EAST
DADEKOTOPON DEVELOPMENT TRUST AND 3 ORS.<o:p></o:p>(DEFENDANTS/RESPONDENT/CROSS
APPELLANT)<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>[COURT OF APPEAL, ACCRA]<o:p></o: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" align="center" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;
text-align:center;line-height:115%;border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in;mso-padding-alt:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">CIVIL
APPEAL SUIT NO: H1/216/06&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;DATE: 21ST OCTOBER, 2010<o:p></o:p>

<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:
justify;line-height:115%;border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in;mso-padding-alt:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">MR. G. A. SARPONG FOR THE
PLAINTIFF/RESPONDENTS <o:p></o:p>

<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:
115%;mso-outline-level:1;border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in;mso-padding-alt:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">MARIAMA OWUSU J.A.
(PRESIDING), YAW-APPAU J.A., MARFUL-SAU J.A.<o:p></o:p>

</div><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">

</div>BY
COURT; JUDGMENT<o:p></o:p>On
the 27-4-05, the Fast Track High Court, Accra, gave judgment for the plaintiff
in the following terms; <o:p></o:p>"Reading sections 2.1.3, 2.1.4
and 2.1.6 together with 7.1.2 and 7.1.3 which deals with effective of default,
it is my view that the parties understood that the loan will be paid from the
sale of the land. Indeed to secure payment of the amount land ie 30 unserviced
plots of land were identified and mortgaged to the plaintiff. It is my view
that plaintiff’s relief which I can grant in the circumstances of this case is
for plaintiff to proceed against the 30 unserviced plots mortgaged as security
for the payment of the loan and interest thereon. The value of these plots I
believe would have hiked since the due date of payment of the loan to take care
of any additional interest that might have accrued on the loan." <o:p></o:p>The
defendants counter claim was dismissed as not proved. Cost of Ten million cedis
[¢10m] was awarded in favor of the plaintiff. <o:p></o:p>Dissatisfied
with the decision of the court, the plaintiff filed an appeal to this court. <o:p></o:p>The
Grounds of Appeal are as follows; <o:p></o:p>a. That the learned trial judge erred
in declining, ignoring and or failing to enter judgment in favor of the
plaintiff against 2nd, 3rd, and 4th defendants on the basis of the Personal
Guarantees executed by 2nd, 3rd and 4th defendants for the grant of ¢1.7
billion loan. <o:p></o:p>b. That the learned trial judge erred
in holding that the plaintiff’s equity contribution in the Joint Venture ship,
TRAFEL LTD. was ¢14 billion instead of ¢3 billion as stipulated in the Joint
Venture Agreement. <o:p></o:p>c. That the learned trial judge erred
in holding that calls were made on the plaintiff to pay additional
contributions. <o:p></o:p>The reliefs sought from the Court of
Appeal are; <o:p></o:p>[1]
Recovery of the sum of ¢2,330,967,303.31 plus interest from 1-7-05 till date of
final payment from 2nd, 3rd, and 4th defendants. <o:p></o:p>[2]
An order restoring plaintiff’s equity contribution in the Joint Venture ship to
¢3 billion as provided for under the JOINT Venture Agreement. <o:p></o:p>On
the 26-5-06, the defendants filed Notice of Appeal in which they are
complaining about the whole judgment. Their Grounds of Appeal as contain in
their Notice of Appeal are as follows; <o:p></o:p>[i]
That the learned judge erred in holding that, the loan was due even though he
acknowledged that a contingent condition precedent for the payment of the loan
had not occurred. <o:p></o:p>[ii]
That the learned judge erred in holding that the defendants were liable to pay
the loan when the parties in their wisdom had agreed in the Loan Agreement that
the loan should be paid from proceeds obtained from the sale of plots of land
by the Joint Venture Company, </main>