THOMAS YALLEY vs. MRS. ADUTWUMWAA & OR. [2016]DLHC3828

Date	2016-05-24
Suit No.	SUIT NO.OCC/12/15
Citation No.	[2016]DLHC3828

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

MARGARET MARY ADJEI TWUM FOR PLAINTIFF

NO LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE FOR DEFENDANTS

[2016]DLHC3828
																																						<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" >THOMAS YALLEY<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>MRS. ADUTWUMWAA &amp;
OR.<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.OCC/12/15&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: 24TH MAY, 2016<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:&nbsp;&nbsp; <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;Times New Roman&quot;;
mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi"><o:p></o:p>MARGARET MARY ADJEI TWUM
FOR 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">

NO
LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE FOR DEFENDANTS <o:p></o:p>

ANGELINA
MENSAH-HOMIAH (MRS.) 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">

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

</div>The
Plaintiff in this case has sued the Defendants herein who have been described
as mother and son for the recovery of GH¢16,000.00 and interest thereon paid to
them. Alternatively, the Plaintiff is seeking recovery of an unregistered KIA
K2700 being the vehicle the Defendants promised to sell to him.<o:p></o:p>The
Plaintiff's case is that sometime in the year 2012 and after he had become
acquainted with the Defendants, the defendants agreed to arrange with their
relative abroad to purchase a KIA K2700 for him. As a result, the Plaintiff
alleged that he paid a total amount of GH¢8,000.00 to the Defendants for the
purchase and also paid the clearing charges but the Defendants refused to hand
over the vehicle to him after the same had been cleared from the port.<o:p></o:p>The
Defendants' also put up the defence that at the commencement of the
transaction, the Plaintiff informed their relative who lives abroad on phone
that the price range of the truck in issue was GH¢ 25,000.00 to GH¢40,000.00 in
Ghana whereupon the Plaintiff was made to deposit GH¢3000.00. They did not
dispute that a total payment of GH¢8000 was made to them towards the purchase
of the vehicle but that the Plaintiff delayed in paying for the clearing
charges and by the time their relative stepped in to save the situation,
additional charges had been incurred by way of rent.<o:p></o:p>This
court has to decide these issues:<o:p></o:p>1.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Whether
or not the Plaintiff paid sixteen thousand Ghana Cedis (GH¢16,000.00) to
Defendants to purchase a vehicle for him?<o:p></o:p>2.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Whether
or not the Defendants engaged a clearing agent to clear the said vehicle?<o:p></o:p>3.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Whether
or not the Defendants purchased the vehicle for the Plaintiff?<o:p></o:p>4.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Whether
or not the Plaintiff is entitled to his claim?<o:p></o:p>This
being a civil suit, the Plaintiff bears the burden of proof of the assertions
contained in his statement of claim which have been denied by the Defendants.
He is required to adduce credible evidence, documentary, oral or both to
satisfy the mind of the court that his assertions are true.&nbsp; If he is able to do so, the burden of
persuasion will shift to the Defendants to introduce evidence to the contrary.&nbsp; In the event that the Defendants fail to
introduce&nbsp; credible evidence which
outweighs that of the Plaintiff, the Plaintiff will be deemed to have succeeded
in proving his assertions. That is because by the provisions of sections 11(4)
and 12 of the Evidence Act 1975, NRCD 323, the court is enjoined to assess all
the evidence on record on the balance of probabilities and decide whose case is
more favourable.<o:p></o:p>