AZAR CHEMICAL INDUSTRIES LIMITED vs. KWARTENG AMANING [2014]DLHC3833

Date	2014-12-16
Suit No.	SUIT NO.RPC/42/14
Citation No.	[2014]DLHC3833

ANGELINA MENSAH-HOMIAH (MRS.) JUSTICE OF THE HIGH COURT

OSEI WUSU ANTWI FOR THE PLAINTIFF

AKUA POKUAA KWARTENG FOR THE DEFENDANT

[2014]DLHC3833
																																						<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" ><a name="OLE_LINK1">AZAR
CHEMICAL INDUSTRIES LIMITED<o:p></o:p></a>vs.<o:p></o:p>KWARTENG AMANING<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;[HIGH COURT (COMMERCIAL DIVISION), KUMASI]<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">

SUIT NO.RPC/42/14&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;&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: 16TH DECEMBER, 2014<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:&nbsp;&nbsp; <o:p></o:p>OSEI
WUSU ANTWI FOR THE PLAINTIFF<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">

ANGELINA MENSAH-HOMIAH (MRS.)<span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;
font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;mso-fareast-font-family:&quot;Arial Unicode MS&quot;;
mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Arial Unicode MS&quot;"> JUSTICE OF THE HIGH COURT<o:p></o:p>

JUDGMENT<o:p></o:p>

</div>The
Plaintiff’s action is for the recovery of the sum of GH¢44,483.62 being the
outstanding balance of various products supplied to the Defendant since
15/07/2012. The Defendant denied the quantum of his indebtedness to the
Plaintiff and after settlement had broken down, two issues were set down for
trial, namely, <o:p></o:p><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;;mso-ansi-language:EN-US">1.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
Whether or not the
Defendant owes the Plaintiff the sum of GH¢44,483.62?<o:p></o:p><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;;mso-ansi-language:EN-US">2.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
Whether or not the
Plaintiff is entitled to interest on the said amount?<o:p></o:p>At
the trial, evidence was adduced on behalf of the Plaintiff by its debt recovery
officer by name Solomon Yacham. His testimony was straight to the point. He
told the court that the Plaintiff had been supplying the Defendant with Azar
paint products on a one month credit basis, calculated from the date of supply.
Between February, 2012 and September, 2012, the Defendant failed to pay for
products supplied to him.<o:p></o:p>In
support of its case, the Plaintiff’s representative tendered in evidence
invoices and a ledger account as exhibits A, A1 to A6, B and B1.&nbsp; Relying on exhibits B and B1, he gave the
outstanding balances in respect of Azar Shield and other Azar products as GH¢39, 820.04 and GH¢5,018.39 respectively. He
stated that it is the sum of these figures which resulted in the amount
endorsed on the writ of summons.<o:p></o:p>In
cross-examination, counsel for the Defendant challenged the Plaintiff’s
evidence that the credit sales&nbsp;&nbsp; was for
one month only. The Defendant repeated this in his evidence-in chief. He
tendered various invoices (exhibit 1 series) to buttress his point. He admitted
in his evidence that before the Plaintiff stopped supplying him with products,
his indebtedness exceeded GH¢50,000.00
and, because he was making payments, it had reduced at the time the Plaintiff
instituted this action. After the commencement of this action, the Defendant
said h</main>