DAVID AMPONSAH vs. MICHAEL ADU BOAHENE, JOSEPH TWUMASI AND KOJO OKYERE [2016]DLHC4052

Date	2016-12-22
Suit No.	SUIT NO. OCC 73/2014
Citation No.	[2016]DLHC4052

DR. RICHMOND OSEI-HWERE JUSTICE OF THE HIGH COURT

FRANCIS KWABENA NYARKO FOR THE PLAINTIFF

[2016]DLHC4052
																																						<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" >DAVID AMPONSAH<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>MICHAEL ADU BOAHENE, JOSEPH TWUMASI AND KOJO OKYERE<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 0in 0in;margin-left:0in;margin-right:.1in">

SUIT&nbsp;NO. OCC 73/2014&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; DATE: 22ND DECEMBER, 2016<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL
<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">

FRANCIS
KWABENA NYARKO FOR THE PLAINTIFF<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;margin-left:0in;margin-right:.1in">

DR.
RICHMOND OSEI-HWERE JUSTICE OF THE HIGH
COURT<o:p></o:p>

</div><p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="margin-top:1.45pt;margin-right:0in;
margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:center;
line-height:115%;mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:none;text-autospace:
none"><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;margin-left:0in;margin-right:.1in">

<p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="margin-top:1.45pt;margin-right:0in;
margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:center;
line-height:115%;mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:none;text-autospace:
none;border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;padding:0in;
mso-padding-alt:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">JUDGMENT<o:p></o:p>

</div>On
5 February, 2014 the plaintiff herein instituted the instant action against the
1st Defendant herein. The 1st defendant prayed the court
for the 2nd and 3rd Defendants herein to be joined to the
suit. The application for joinder was granted and the 2nd and 3rd
Defendants were joined to the suit. Subsequently, the Plaintiff amended his
writ of summons and statement of claim. The reliefs sought per the amended writ
of summons were as follows:<o:p></o:p>“a.
An order for the recovery of GH¢ 11, 070.00 from the Defendant which sum
represents the price of the Opel Astra Caravan he purchased from the Defendant
and the expenses he has made on the vehicle which has turned to be fraudulent
and passed no title to the Plaintiff<o:p></o:p>b.
An order for the Plaintiff to go into account with the Defendant for GH¢ 25.00
the driver was making everyday including Sundays from the time the Opel Astra
was seized from the driver up to the time the Defendant will pay him the amount
he has spent on the Opel Astra Caravan.<o:p></o:p>c.
Damages for breach of contract.<o:p></o:p>d.
Any other relief deemed appropriate by the Honourable Court.”<o:p></o:p>The
2nd Defendant herein entered an appearance on 13/08/2014 and filed a
statement of defence on 20/08/2014. In the statement of defence, the 1st
Defendant denied liability to the plaintiff’s claim on the basis that he bought
the vehicle from the 2nd Defendant and that he conducted due
diligence to ensure that the documents were genuine before selling same to the
plaintiff. He also averred that the 2nd Defendant will be in a
position to assist the court determining the authenticity of the documents.<o:p></o:p>The
2nd Defendant also denied liability to the plaintiff and stated in
his statement of defence that he only acted as an intermediary for the 1st
Defendant in the sale of the vehicle to the plaintiff. He also emphasised that
he had never owned the vehicle in question and said that he is not in a
position to ascertain the authenticity of the documents covering the vehicle.<o:p></o:p>It
is important to note that the 3rd Defendant did not enter an
appearance in spite of the service of the court processes on him by substituted
service.<o:p></o:p>After
unsuccessful attempts at settlement, four issues were set down for trial
namely:<o:p></o:p><span lang="EN-GB" 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;">1.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
Whether or not the
documents covering the Opel Astra Caravan with Registration No. GR 1219-12
given to Plaintiff was fake;<o:p></o:p><span lang="EN-GB" 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;">2.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
Whether the vehicle in
issue belonged to 1st Defendant and 2nd Defendant only
acted as intermediary for the 1st Defendant for the sale to
Plaintiff;<o:p></o:p>