Datsomor Vrs Ocansey [2022] GHADC 63 (7 December 2022)

IN THE DISTRICT COURT, KADJEBI IN THE OTI REGION OF THE REPUBLIC OF GHANA, HELD ON 07TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2022 BEFORE H/W ERIC K. FIAMORDZI ESQ, MAGISTRATE Suit No: A2/01/2022 FRANCIS DATSOMOR OF KADJEBI - PLAINTIFF V MICHAEL OCANSEY OF KADJEBI - DEFENDANTS JUDGMENT The judgement herein originates from a writ of summons files by the plaintiff against the defendant as require by the District Court Rules, 2009, C. I 59, order 2 rule 3(6) for the following reliefs; 1. Recovery of an amount of one thousand and forty-nine Ghana Cedis (GH₵1049.00) being the outstanding Electricity bill, the defendant owed when he was a tenant in the house numbered H/No; AVOR-037, Kadjebi Avornyokope since the month of January, 2021, which accumulated amount of money he (defendant has refused or failed to pay despite repeated demands. 2. Cost of the application. SUMMARY OF THE SUBJECT MATTER OF CLAIM Plaintiff is a businessman resident at Kadjebi whilst the Defendant is an employee of the Kadjebi District Assembly, and also a resident at Kadjebi-Avornyokope. Plaintiff states that he rented an apartment in his house to the defendant in his house numbered H/No. AVOR-037. But the defendant has failed or refused to pay his accumulated electricity bills from January 2021 till he (defendant) vacated plaintiff’s house in April 2022. He concluded that, all efforts made to enable the defendant pay this outstanding electricity/ light bill has failed, wherefore the plaintiff claims per his writ of summons. HEARING On the 29th day of July, 2022, the parties appeared before the court, and the defendant pleaded liable to the reliefs of the plaintiff, when his plea was taken. The defendant explained that, it is not the plaintiff who is in charge of sharing the monthly electricity bills among the tenants in his house. He added that, the one in charge of sharing the bills overbilled him (defendant) to pay. So, he rather approached the plaintiff to intervene and ensure that the bills were re-shared to reflect the correct amounts to be paid by each tenant. But, the plaintiff rather instructed him (defendant) to go and pay what has been allotted to him to pay. In view of the explanation given by the defendant, the court changed his plea from “liable” to “not liable” in order that the matter was heard and determined on its merit. The court then ordered that the parties to file their witnesses’ statements and any relevant documents in their possession, in relation to the subject matter of claim. The parties complied with the orders of the court. However, on the 2nd day of September, 2022, the defendant announced that he has decided to pay an amount of five hundred and fifty-six Ghana Cedis (GH₵556.00) to the plaintiff as part of the electricity bills owed in arrears. Since then, the defendant has been unable to appear before the court. The plaintiff then applied viva voce for judgment to be entered in his favor in order for him to go into execution. The issues for the determination of the court are whether or not; 1. The defendant is to pay the amount quoted by the plaintiff in full or any obligation at all. 2. The defendant has been treated fairly by the plaintiff. Issues concerning the distribution and payment of electricity and water bills have been a thorny issue especially in metered compound houses where the landlord(s) and, or their agents of family member(s) also rely on the use of such facilities. Often times, those who collect/ take the bills to share among the users in such situations try to make benefits out of the other users. When the bills are brought and are to be shared, it would just be fair for each occupant of the house/ facility available during the time of disbursement to have a fair look or knowledge of how much has been billed for the period, and how many points each other member would be paying for. As a court, I have not lost sight of the fact that some tenant(s) or users of such utilities are generally difficult. However open and transparent one may be, they still have issues over the distribution and payment of bills. Many forget that security lights in use have to be paid for, whilst others turn to raise issues over their inability to be around during that period (either on leave or during weekend travels), or even over the number of occupants in one particular room or the other. Honestly and genuinely, where there are about six (6) occupants in a chamber and hall structure or an apartment who are billed to pay for the use of say, six (6) points depending on the gadgets in use, a similar facility with only one person, who is billed to pay for the use of say, the same six (6) points might not easily comprehend the logic behind the sharing of the bill. This is because, where each of the six (6) members living in one apartment might have to iron clothing(s) for such six (6) people are made to pay perhaps six (6) points for ironing of their clothing within a given period, an individual who may be require to pay the same six (6) points or even less for ironing his/ her clothing during the same period, might not easily fathom what informs such a sharing of the bill. How about if that one person also receives a visitor or visitors, who would be spending a month or two before leaving? Must that occupant be made to pay bills for the use of light and or water if the bills finally arrive at a time their visitors have left or, what goes on? In the instant suit, the defendant is to pay the amount of one thousand and forty-nine Ghana Cedis (GH₵1,049.00) from the month of January, 2021 to the month of April, 2022, which covers a period of about 16 months. Mention has not been made of what he pays or had to pay for the use of electricity over a period of one month. Also, which bill or amount that is brought within a month or period and how many people were to share the amount has also not been stated. How be it, the defendant has decided to pay the amount given him to pay and he has even started effecting the payment after which he has abandoned the matter for whatever reason. In relying on the facts, the evidence and the law (i.e Arrital Ghana V. Accra City Hotels [2015] 90 GMJ. 134 CA), I enter judgement in favor of the plaintiff against the defendant. The defendant is to pay the amount due in full to the plaintiff. I also award a cost of two hundred and fifty Ghana Cedis (Gh₵250.00) against the defendant in favor of the plaintiff. H/W ERIC K. FIAMORDZI (MAGISTRATE) 5