UNIVERSAL MERCHANT BANK LTD. vs. AKOSOMBO TEXTILES LIMITED [2016]DLHC3520

Date	2016-07-08
Suit No.	SUIT NO.BFS/281/2014
Citation No.	[2016]DLHC3520

HIS LORDSHIP ERIC KYEI BAFFOUR JUSTICE OF THE HIGH COURT

[2016]DLHC3520
																																						<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">UNIVERSAL
MERCHANT BANK LTD.<o:p></o:p></a>vs.<o:p></o:p>AKOSOMBO TEXTILES LIMITED <o:p></o:p>[HIGH COURT (COMMERCIAL DIVISION), 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">

SUIT
NO.BFS/281/2014&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: 8TH JULY, 2016 <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 1.0pt 0in">

HIS LORDSHIP ERIC KYEI BAFFOUR JUSTICE
OF THE HIGH COURT<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">

JUDGEMENT<o:p></o:p>

</div>Plaintiff
claims the following reliefs endorsed on its writ issued against the defendant<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">i.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
Recovery of the sum
of Ghc2,092,984.85 (Two Million, Ninety two Thousand, Nine Hundred and eighty-Four
Ghana cedis, Eighty-Five Pesewas)<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">ii.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
Interest the sum of
Ghc2,092,984.85 at the rate of 5% per annum above the prevailing base rate of
the Plaintiff from 31st July, 2014 till date of final judgment.<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">iii.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
Recovery of the sum
US$1,104,732.94 (One Million, One Hundred and Four Thousand Seven Hundred and
Thirty-Two United States Dollars, Ninety-Four Cents) or its cedi equivalent.<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">iv.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
Interest on the sum
of US$1,104,732.94 at the rate of 12% per annum&nbsp;
from 31st July, 2014 till date of final payment<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">v.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
Judicial sale of
the mortgage/charged properties in satisfaction of the judgment debt<o:p></o:p>In the statement of claim that accompanied the writ,
plaintiff claims that it disbursed a number of loan facilities to the defendant
and as defendant could not meet up with the repayments schedules the loans were
restructured for the defendant. That the restructured loan facilities came to
an amount Ghc1,956,250.00 and an overdraft facility of US$1.000.000.00. The
restructured facility had a retirement date of 31st December, 2014.<o:p></o:p>To plaintiff as defendant defaulted it called in the
facilities and demanded the repayment of the entire sum of monies. And yet the
defendant has failed to repay the monies claimed together with the penal
interest as agreed between the parties per the agreement they entered into and
defendant will not repay the facilities unless compelled by the court to pay.<o:p></o:p>Defendant in its statement of defence and
counterclaimed denied the claim of the plaintiff claiming that plaintiff unduly
delayed in the disbursement of the loan thereby defeating the purpose for which
the loan was to be provided it as well as exposing it to third party
contractual obligations. And as plaintiff frustrated the timelines set it lies
ill in the mouth of the plaintiff to complain about the defendant’s inability
to service the loans on the agreed terms between the parties. Defendant also
denied any entitlement of penal charges to the plaintiff. Defendant accordingly
counterclaimed for the following reliefs:<o:p></o:p><ol style="margin-top:0in" start="1" type="i">
 <li class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; line-height: 115%;">A declaration
</main>