GHANA COMMERCIAL BANK LTD (PLAINTIFF) vs. KOFI AGYEKUM AND ANR. (DEFENDANTS) [2019]DLHC7133

Date	2019-04-18
Suit No.	SUIT NO: BFS/100/12
Citation No.	[2019]DLHC7133

HIS LORDSHIP SAMUEL K. A. ASIEDU J.

R.O. SOLOMON ESQ. FOR PLAINTIFF.

NANA AMA AMPONSAH ESQ. FOR 2ND DEFENDANT ABSENT

[2019]DLHC7133
																																						<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" >GHANA COMMERCIAL BANK
LTD<o:p></o:p>(PLAINTIFF)<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>KOFI AGYEKUM AND ANR.<o:p></o:p>(DEFENDANTS)<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</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/100/12&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &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: 18TH
APRIL, 2019<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL: <o:p></o:p>R.O. SOLOMON ESQ., 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">

NANA
AMA AMPONSAH ESQ., FOR 2ND DEFENDANT ABSENT.<o:p></o:p>

</div>CORAM:<o:p></o:p>HIS LORDSHIP SAMUEL K. A.
ASIEDU, J.<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border-top:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
border-left:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;border-right:none;
padding:1.0pt 0in 1.0pt 0in">

<p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;
text-align:center;border:none;mso-border-top-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;padding:0in;mso-padding-alt:1.0pt 0in 1.0pt 0in">RULING<o:p></o:p>

</div>The
plaintiff issued a writ on the 27th April 2012, against the within
named defendants to recover a sum of money from the defendants which the
plaintiff says is a judgment debt arising out of a facility or facilities which
it made available to one David Duah Boateng and for which the defendants herein
mortgaged various properties as security for the repayment of the said
facilities.<o:p></o:p>On
the 14th February 2017, the 2nd defendant/applicant
herein served a notice to produce certain documents mentioned in the statement
of claim including: <o:p></o:p>1.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; The facility letter(s) and the heads of
agreements(s) pursuant to which the mortgages referred to in paragraphs 2 (a)
and 2 (b) were created.<o:p></o:p>2.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Deed of mortgage dated 17th November
1995.<o:p></o:p>3.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Deed of mortgage dated 25th January,
2001.<o:p></o:p>4.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; The bank statement of accounts on all the
facilities (or monies) advanced to David Duah Boateng from 17th
November 1995 when the first mortgage was purportedly created till 31st
December 2011 including the current account and/ or loan account if any.<o:p></o:p>The
plaintiff/respondent filed a notice of objection to the production of some of
the documents on the grounds that those documents are irrelevant to the case of
the applicant. However, the plaintiff went ahead to produce the documents to
which it had no objection. Consequently, on the 31st January 2019,
the applicant filed the instant motion for an order directed at the plaintiff
to produce the documents in contention; that is, the facility letter covering
the 1995 facility granted to David Duah Boateng, the facility letter covering
the 2001 facility granted to David Duah Boateng and finally the bank statements
from 1995 to 2001.<o:p></o:p>Counsel
for the plaintiff submitted that in 2001 no fresh facility was granted the said
David Duah Boateng but that the mortgage given by the 2nd defendant
was to support a facility which had existed since 1995. According to counsel it
was on the 20th June 2002 that David Duah Boateng applied for a
facility which was covered by the mortgage made by the 2nd defendant
and that that application was granted on the 25th July 2002. Again
counsel explained that David Duah Boateng further applied for another facility
in August 2003 which was granted in January 2004. This facility was also
supported by the 2nd defendant’s mortgage.<o:p></o:p>After
listening to counsel, the court has formed the view that if the mortgage given
by the 2nd defendant in 2001 went to support an existing facility
which dates back to 1995, then it is not out of place that the 2nd
defendant demands to know the terms of that facility and the accounts covering
that facility notwithstanding the fact that at the creation of that facility
the 2nd defendant had then not come into the scene. As long as the 2nd</</main>