TIGER FORCE MICROFINANCE LTD. vs. KOFI ANNAN SAMSON [2017]DLHC3479

Date	2017-11-03
Suit No.	SUIT NO.MISC/0092/17
Citation No.	[2017]DLHC3479

HIS LORDSHIP ERIC KYEI BAFFOUR JUSTICE OF THE HIGH COURT

[2017]DLHC3479
																																						<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">TIGER FORCE MICROFINANCE LTD.<o:p></o:p></a>vs.<o:p></o:p>KOFI ANNAN SAMSON<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;[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.MISC/0092/17&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &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: 3RD NOVEMBER, 2017<o:p></o:p>

</div><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-font-kerning:0pt;mso-ansi-language:
EN-US;mso-fareast-language:EN-US">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">

<p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height:115%;mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
mso-layout-grid-align:auto;punctuation-wrap:hanging;text-autospace:ideograph-numeric ideograph-other;
border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;padding:0in;
mso-padding-alt:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">HIS
LORDSHIP ERIC KYEI BAFFOUR JUSTICE OF THE HIGH COURT<o:p></o:p>

</div><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-font-kerning:0pt;mso-ansi-language:
EN-US;mso-fareast-language:EN-US"><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">

RULING<o:p></o:p>

</div>Applicant/Respondent on the 2nd of June,
2017 filed an application under section 33(b) and 34(2) of the Borrowers and
Lenders Act, 2008, Act 773 asking the court for a warrant to possess and
realize what he claims to be a charged mortgage property situate at Kwabenya,
near Accra to satisfy what Applicant/Respondent contend is the failure of the
Respondent/Applicant to repay monies advanced to him as loans.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <o:p></o:p>This motion before me attacks the propriety of the
application for sale of the mortgage property on several fronts and
Respondent/Applicant prays for the dismissal in limini of the application mounted under the Borrowers and
Lenders. The substance to the application is provided in a 20 paragraph
affidavit and supplementary affidavit filed in support of the application which
can be summarized as follows:<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>First Respondent/Applicant claim he has never taken
any loan of Gh¢74,000.00 from the Applicant company to necessitate any
application for warrant to possess his property. And that it was an entity
known and called Tiger Force Consultancy Ghana Ltd which entered into a loan
agreement with him for an amount of Ghc¢15,000.00 to be advanced to him. And
that besides this loan of Ghc¢15,000.00 he has not taken any loan from the
Tiger Force Consultancy even though upon the expiration of the duration of that
loan various agreements were signed but no loans were disbursed.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>Respondent/Applicant argues that the entities Tiger
Force Consultancy Services and Tiger Force Financial Consult that he dealt with
had no capacity or legal status whatsoever to grant loans and charge him
interest. To Respondent/Applicant the results of the searches conducted at the
Registrar General’s Department confirmed that indeed there is no entity by name
Tiger Force Financial Consult and there was no power vested in such entity to
grant loans.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The other leg of the claim of Respondent/Applicant is
to the effect that even if such entity were to be in existence and the loans
granted him a valid loan, there was no provision that mandated
Applicant/Respondent to charge him a penalty of Gh¢400.00 per month and neither
has he ever used his property at Kwabenya as security for the loan. He further
alleges fraud on the part of the Applicant/Respondent as he claim never to have
seen or signed any loan document for disbursement of Ghc74,000.00. To
Respondent/Applicant as the application under Act 773 is based on a
misrepresentation same ought to be dismissed by the court.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The factual basis of this application has strongly
been rebuffed by Applicant/Respondent through an affidavit in opposition
deposed to by Fati Amadu, a loan officer with Applicant /Respondent Company
claiming that the present application is misconceived and a subterfuge employed
to buy time in the settling of the just debt of the Respondent/Applicant. <o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>First the Applicant/Respondent claim that the entity
which granted the loan is one and the same and that it had at all material
times been properly and legally constituted and is licensed as a moneylender or
licensed to operate as a non-bank financial institution. It therefore contends
that it has the requite capacity to grant loans and charge interest. It further
explains that it was registered as Tiger Force Financial Consultancy but in
May, 2012 it changed its name to Tiger Force Microfinance Ltd and objects
included grant of loans. That it has subsequently been granted license to
operate as a non-bank financial institution. It finally refutes the claim that
the Kwabenya house was not used as security for the loans.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>For ease of resolution of the issues raised by the
Respondent/Applicant for the dismissal of the suit, I conveniently break them
into the fol</main>