Sally Duse Vrs Anthony Dogbe [2022] GHADC 6 (2 November 2022)

SALLY DUSE VRS ANTHONY DOGBE IN THE DISTRICT COURT ONE, TEMA ON WEDNESDAY 2ND NOVEMBER, 2022 BEFORE H/W MRS. BIANCA ADWOA OSEI-SARFO (ESQ.), SITTING AS A MAGISTRATE. SALLY DUSE PLAINTIFF VRS A2/17/2022 ANTHONY DOGBE DEFENDANT Plaintiff: Present Defendant: Absent Counsel: Roland B. Attafuah for Michael O. Awuah: Present Time: 9:17 A. M. RULING This matter is for a ruling. Paragraph 3 – work and pay basis – hire purchase agreement Plaintiff says at paragraph 4 agreed that Defendant pay GHS 17,200 - The Defendant paid only 2 weeks and then reported that the tricycle had been stolen - Recovery of an amount of GHS 17,200 being money outstanding for the price of the tricycle and interest. The nature of the matter is a hire – purchase agreement. Justice must be done and it is cardinal respective of every Court to ensure that same is done. The first date that the matter was called, the Plaintiff was absent and the Defendant was present. The matter was struck out For Want Of Prosecution. At the next adjourned date, the Plaintiff was present but the SALLY DUSE VRS ANTHONY DOGBE Defendant was absent and by that date, the Plaintiff had filed a motion for judgment on admission without applying for relistment of suit. The motion for relistment was moved and granted on the 15th June 2022 and the next adjourned date i.e 18th August 2022 the Defendant was absent. He has not been served with a hearing notice. Finally on the 1st September 2022, the motion was moved by which time, by the virtue of the trajectory of the case, the Defendant’s plea had not been taken by the Court, although by then he had filed his Statement of Defence on which Counsel for Plaintiff relies on to pray for judgment on admission. On that day, the Defendant insisted that he does not owe the Plaintiff but felt led to do so for the sake of peace. This matter is also a hire purchase agreement where the subject matter was stolen. This Court finds that it is in the interest of justice to take the Defendant’s plea and have it on record and go to trial to take evidence for true justice to be done especially as Defendant keeps insisting that he does not owe the Plaintiff in fact. Consequently, the application for judgment on admission is denied. Counsel suggests 5th December 2022 for trial. Let the Plaintiff serve hearing notice on the Defendant. (SGD.) ...................................................................... H/W BIANCA ADWOA OSEI-SARFO ESQ (MRS.) SALLY DUSE VRS ANTHONY DOGBE 3