Greenlands Commodities Limited v Osei (RPC.28/2020) [2025] GHAHC 176 (25 February 2025)

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF JUDICATURE, IN THE HIGH COURTOF JUSTICE, COMMERCIAL DIVISION “B” (GENERAL JURISDICTION) HELD AT SUNYANI ON TUESDAY THE 25TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE HER LADYSHIP JUSTICEJOYCE BOAHEN, HIGH COURTJUDGE SUITNO. RPC.28/2020 GREENLANDS COMMODITIES LIMITED PLAINTIFF VRS OSEI WISDOM DEFENDANT JUDGMENT Plaintiff absent Defendant present Nana SekyereBoatengfor thePlaintiff absent BridgetAma Foriwaa holding brief ofRomeoAsante Nimo forthe Defendant present The Plaintiff’s claims against the Defendant per its writ of summons issued on 5th June, 2020arefor; a. An order of the honourable Court compelling the Defendant to pay an amount of Ghs 67,502.16. 1 b. An order of the Court directing the Defendant to pay cost incidental to this action including legal fees of Counsel in terms of the Ghana Bar Association (GBA) approvedscale offees. c. Any otherrelief(s) the honourable Courtdeems fit The Plaintiff is a company incorporated under the laws of Ghana with branches in Techiman in the Bono Region of Ghana and other parts of the country. It deals in agro products particularly purchase of cashew nuts for exports. The Defendant is a business man and lives in Techiman in the Bono East Region. The Plaintiff contends that during the year 2020 cashew season the Defendant solicited money from it and it advanced an amount of Ghs 1,171,575 to the Defendant to buy and supply cashew nuts for the Plaintiff. The Defendant supplied cashew nuts to the tune of Ghs 1,104,072.84 with Ghs 67,502.16 remaining which the Defendant did not account for. Wherefore the Plaintiff mounted the suit against the Defendant claiming the reliefs indorsed onthe writ ofsummons. In its reply and defence to counterclaim the Plaintiff denied the averments in the Defendant’s statement of defence and stated that the Defendant sold some properties belonging to him to defray part of his indebtedness to it and he executed a document admitting his indebtedness to the Plaintiff. Meshack Asante Ameyaw the Operations Manager of the Plaintiff Company gave evidence in chief for the Plaintiff. He repeated 2 the pleadings of the Plaintiff and stated that the Defendant acknowledged and signed a document tendered by the Plaintiff as exhibit “A” series to establish his indebtedness to the Plaintiff. The Plaintiff therefore prays the Court to enter judgment in its favour for thereliefs indorsed onthe writ ofsummons. THEDEFENDANT’SCOUNTERCLAIM The Defendant filed statement ofdefence and counterclaim on30th June, 2020and stated that he has worked with the Plaintiff since the year 2018 and it is not the case that he solicited money from the Plaintiff. Rather the Plaintiff gave him Ghs 1,236,575.00 in bits between 23rd December, 2019 and 24th April, 2020 representing the year 2020 cashew season to purchase cashew nuts for the Plaintiff which he duly supplied to the Plaintiff and not Ghs 1,171,575 as claimed by the Plaintiff. The Defendant claims that prior to the 2020 cashew season he worked for the Plaintiff by supplying cashew nuts for the whole of 2019 and he earned a commission of Ghs 317,411.00 but the Plaintiff refused to pay. In the 2020 cashew season from 23rd December, 2019 to 24th April, 2020 he supplied cashew to the Plaintiff and earned a commission of Ghs 97,088.00 but the Plaintiff refused topay his commission. In the normal course of business in supplying cashew to the Plaintiff he incurred expenses to the tune of Ghs 25,771.56 in the 2020 cashew season alone. He served the 3 Plaintiff dutifully and diligently and he was therefore promoted to the position of branch Accountant of the Plaintiff’s Techiman branch without any problem. According to the Defendant, the Plaintiff prepared power of attorney for him mandating him to represent the interest of the Plaintiff whenever necessary. That the Plaintiff’s claim against him is mischievous, vexatious and without basis and that the Plaintiff is not entitled to its claims against him. The Defendant counterclaimed against the Plaintiff as follows; A. Foran orderof the Court compelling the Plaintiff topay tothe Defendant an amount of Four Hundred and Forty Thousand Two Hundred and Seventy Ghana Cedis Fifty Six Pesewas (Ghs 440,270.56) being commission due the Defendant for the supply of cashew nuts to the Plaintiff for the 2019 and 2020 cashew seasons, and expenses incurred insupplying cashew nuts tothe Plaintiff forthe 2020cashew season. B. Interest on the amount stated in paragraph (a) supra from January 2019 till date of final payment. C. Costs, and anyotherrelief(s) thehonourable Courtmay deemfit togrant The Defendant filed amended witness statement with leave of the Court on `5th June, 2021. He repeated his pleadings in his witness statement and attached exhibit “1” series being letters of engagement and correspondence from the Plaintiff Company to 4 establish that he worked with the Plaintiff in 2018, 2019 and 2020 cashew seasons. The Defendant noted that because he dutifully and diligently discharged his duties with the Plaintiff, the Plaintiff promoted him ahead of his peers to the position of branch Accountant at the Plaintiff’s Techiman branch. Flowing from his good works and trustworthiness, the Plaintiff channeled its operational monies through his personal bank accounts at Universal Merchant Bank (UMB) Techiman branch in the year 2019 as indicated in exhibit “2”. He further tendered exhibit “3” a power of attorney the Plaintiff executed for him to represent the Plaintiff’s interests. He noted that he supplied all the cashew nuts to the Plaintiff in accordance with monies he received from the Plaintiff and that he does not owe the Plaintiff rather the Plaintiff owes him Ghs 440,270.56. These debts according to the Defendant emanated from the Plaintiff’s failure to pay him his commission and expenseshe incurred in supplying cashew to the Plaintiff Company in the 2019 and 2020 cashew seasons. The Defendant contends that in the year 2019 cashew season the Plaintiff advanced Ghs 2,181,344.00 to him to purchase cashew nuts and he supplied the required quantity of cashew nuts but the Plaintiff did not pay him his commission. He attached exhibit “4” series being receipts of all monies the Plaintiff Company advanced to him in 2019. The total amount the Plaintiff owes him in terms of commission is Ghs 317,411.00 which is an accumulation of 0.70p commission per kilogram of the quantity of cashew he supplied to the Plaintiff. In the year 2020 the 5 Plaintiff advanced an amount of Ghs 1,236,575.00 to him and he supplied the required quantity of cashew nuts to the Plaintiff but the Plaintiff failed to pay his commission. He attached exhibit “5’series as evidence of monies the Plaintiff advanced to him to buy cashew in the 2020 season to support his evidence. The Defendant stated that exhibit “5L”, is an amount of Ghs 150,000.00the Plaintiff paid directly into his bank account without issuing an officialreceipt. According to the Defendant the Plaintiff owed him an amount of Ghs 97,088.00 from an aggregate of Ghs 0.80p commission per kilo on all the cashew nuts he supplied to the Plaintiff in the year 2020. He made a tabular representation of his counterclaim against the Plaintiff. The Defendant stated that in the year 2020 in the course of supplying cashew nuts to the Plaintiff Company he incurred a debt of Ghs 25, 771.56; in terms of fuel, Ghs 5,300.56 per exhibit “6” series, Maintenance of trucks, Ghs 4,581.00 per exhibit “7” series, Payment of staff, Ghs 10,557.00 per exhibit “8” series. District Assemblies’Chits/Pass/Tickets, Ghs 643.00 per exhibit “9” series and loading fees, Ghs 4,690.00 per exhibit “10” which sums up to Ghs 440,270.56. He attached exhibit “11” as breakdown of the Plaintiff’s indebtedness to him. The Defendant noted that in the year 2018 when he was a mere agent of the Plaintiff his commissions were duly paid by the Plaintiff but when he became an integralmember of the Plaintiff Company, it accumulated his commission at the end of every season and refused topay the said commission. 6 Exhibit “12” according to the Defendant are receipts of additional commission and cost of sacks (for bagging cashew) for the 2020 cashew season in the sum of Ghs 3,290.16. The Defendant contends that he made persistent demands on the Plaintiff to honour its indebtedness to him but the Plaintiff could not pay because it faced some challenges with the Ghanaian tax authorities. The Plaintiff assured him to pay the money later but it failed. The Defendant admitted that after his purchase of cashew in the 2020 cashew season an amount of Ghs 67,502.16 remained unutilized and he used it to offset the Plaintiff’s indebtedness to him and that the outstanding indebtedness of the Plaintiff to him is Ghs 440,270.56. The Defendant contends that in acknowledgement of its indebtedness to him the company through its 2019 Techiman branch Manager Chelliah Sidharthan, issued a savings withdrawal cheque tendered as exhibit “13” to himinfull satisfactionofthe debt but he could not withdrawit forvarious reasons. Counsel for Plaintiff argued in an address filed on behalf of the Plaintiff with reference to applicable laws on burden of proof and stated that a counterclaim is considered as an independent action. Therefore, a Defendant who counterclaims assumes the same burden of proof as the Plaintiff. Counsel noted that the Plaintiff’s claim that the Defendant owed it Ghs 67,502.16 was not disputed by the Defendant who admitted same under cross examination. Therefore, the Plaintiff has established its case against the Defendant for the sum of Ghs 67,502.16. Counsel argued that the Defendant Counterclaimant from the totality of the evidence has not led any evidence to establish 7 his counterclaim. His evidence is marred with contradictions, incoherence and he over relied onself –serving documents. EVALUATIONOF THE FACTS, EVIDENCE ANDAPPLICATION OF THELAW At the pretrial stage the case was mentioned three times and on all three occasions the Plaintiff was absent. On two out of the three occasions the Plaintiff and his Counsel were absent although they were served with hearing notice. The pre - trial Judge held the view that the Plaintiff was not amenable to settlement hence its failure to attend Court. The Court therefore set down two issues and an omnibus issue below as the issues for trial and referred the matter to the trial Judge for trial. The issues are as follows; 1. Whetheror notthe Plaintiff is entitled tothe reliefs claimed 2. Whetheror notthe Defendant is entitled to his counterclaim 3. Any otherissue raised bythe pleadings In the light of the case of Dalex Finance and Leasing Company Limited v. Ebenezer DenzelAmanor L.G.GCompany Limited and Huawei Technologies(GH) SA Limited Civil Appeal No. J4/02/2020 dated 14th April, 2021 which held that the reason why the 8 parties are in Court is whether or not they are entitled to their reliefs and therefore that should not be set down as issues for trial, I hereby strike out issues (1) and (2) as the issues setdown for trial. In the circumstance, I would subsume any issue(s) arising from the pleadings of the parties to be determined under issue (3) as “Any other issue arising fromthe pleadings”.The first issue fordeterminationis; ISSUE1 Whether or not the Defendant owes the Plaintiff the sum of Ghs 67,502.16 being amount remaining from an amount of Ghs 1,171,575.00 the Plaintiff gave to the Defendant to buy and supply cashew nuts for the Plaintiff in the year 2020 cashew season which the Defendant failed toaccountfor The Plaintiff Company contendsthat during the year 2020cashew season the Defendant solicited money from it and it advanced an amount of Ghs 1,171,575 to the Defendant to buy and supply cashew nuts for the Plaintiff. The Defendant supplied cashew nuts to the tune of Ghs 1,104,072.84 with Ghs 67,502.16 remaining which the Defendant did not account for. The Plaintiff therefore mounted this action to claim the said amount from the Defendant and cost of legal fees it incurred in mounting this suit. The Plaintiff’s Operations Manager testified on behalf of the Plaintiff that the Defendant acknowledged and signed a document to establish his indebtedness to the Plaintiff. He 9 tendered the said document as exhibit “A” series. He relied on exhibit ‘B” and stated that pursuant to the Defendant’s acknowledgement of his indebtedness to the Plaintiff by signing exhibit “A” series, the Plaintiff seized two Bongo trucks belonging to the Defendant valued at Ghs 65,000.00 to defray part of the Defendant’s indebtedness to the Plaintiff per exhibit “B” which the Defendant admitted under cross – examination that at the time he settled accounts with the Plaintiff the money with him was Ghs 132,381.00 in terms of exhibit “B” and after the settlement the net balance was Ghs 67,381.00. The Defendant after denying that he owed the Plaintiff and that he supplied cashew nutsto the amount ofmoneythe Plaintiff gavehim, eventually admitted the amount the Plaintiff claims against him by stating in paragraph (22) of his evidence in chief as follows; After my purchase of cashew for the Plaintiff for the 2020 season, an amount of Ghs 67,502.16 remained unutilized but I used same to offset part of the debt the company owes me. The Plaintiff’s remaining indebtednessto meis what stands at Ghs 440,270.56. It is important to note that regarding the Plaintiff’s claims against the Defendant the critical issue for determination is whether or not the Defendant owes the Plaintiff the amount claimed against him in the Plaintiff’s writ of summons. Per paragraph (22) of the Defendant’s evidence in chief cited supra the Defendant unequivocally admitted the 10 amount which buttresses the Plaintiff’s claim that the Defendant owes it the above amount and that the Defendant signed documents to the effect that he owesthe Plaintiff the above amount. The Plaintiff seized the Defendant’s two Bongo trucks to defray part of the debt the Defendant owed it. The Defendant’s outstanding indebtedness to the Plaintiff is Ghs 67,502.16.Therefore, the main reason why the Plaintiff mounted this suit against the Defendant is confirmed by the Defendant’s own testimony although the Defendant initially claimed that he supplied cashew in accordance with the money the Plaintiff gavehim andthat hedoes notowethe Plaintiff. With reference to copious authorities on the burden of proof Counsel for Plaintiff stated in his written address filed on behalf of the Plaintiff that the Plaintiff’s claim that the Defendant owed it Ghs 67,502.16 was not disputed by the Defendant who admitted it under cross examination. Therefore, the Plaintiff has established its case against the Defendant for the sum of Ghs 67,502.16. Counsel therefore prayed the Court to enter judgment in favour of the Plaintiff. Counsel for Defendant on the other hand stated in his written address in support of the Defendant’s counterclaim that in respect of the Plaintiff’s claim against the Defendant contained in the Plaintiff’s writ of summons, the Defendant did not shy away from the fact that he did owe the Plaintiff but his explanation was that he used the amount of Ghs 67,502.16 which remained with him from the money the Plaintiff advanced to him for the purchase of cashew, to offset part ofthe debt the Plaintiff owedhim. 11 Section 10(1)and 11(4) ofthe Evidence Act, 1975(NRCD323) states as follows; 10.Burden ofpersuasion defined (1) For the purposes of this Act, the burden of persuasion means the obligation of a party to establish a requisite degree of belief concerning a fact in the mind of the tribunal of fact or the Court. 11.Burden ofproducing evidence defined (1) Forthe purposes of this Act, the burdenof producing evidence meansthe obligation of aparty tointroducesufficient evidenceto avoid aruling on the issueagainst that party. (4) In other circumstances the burden of producing evidence requires a party to produce sufficient evidence which on the totality of the evidence, leads a reasonable mind to conclude that the existenceof the factwas more probable than its non-existence. In the light of the foregoing the Court is persuaded and satisfied by the evidence adduced by the Plaintiff which was affirmed by the Defendant that the Defendant owes the Plaintiff an amount of Ghs 67,502.16 being the remaining amount out of an amount of Ghs 1,171,575 the Plaintiff advanced to the Defendant to buy cashew nuts for the Plaintiffin the 2020cashew season whichthe Defendant failed to account tothe Plaintiff. Inthe circumstance, the issue regarding whether ornot the Defendant owesthe Plaintiff 12 the sum of Ghs 67,502.16 being amount remaining from an amount of Ghs 1,171,575.00 the Plaintiff gaveto the Defendant to buy and supply cashew nuts forthe Plaintiff in the year 2020 cashew season is hereby affirmed that the Defendant owed the Plaintiff Ghs 67, 502.16 which the Defendant failed to account for. In the circumstance, the Court holds a fervent view that the Plaintiff fully discharged its burden of proof against the Defendant and is therefore entitled to the reliefs indorsed in its writ of summons against the Defendant. It is worthy to note that the Defendant’s admission of the sum claimed against him by the Plaintiff is sufficient but the Defendant’s allegation that he used the Plaintiff’s money to offset money the Plaintiff owed him is not justifiable. In thelight ofthe foregoing, I herebygrantthe Plaintiff’s reliefs asfollows; a) The Court hereby makes an order compelling the Defendant to pay an amount of Ghs 67,502.16tothe Plaintiff. b) The Defendant is hereby ordered to pay reasonable cost incidental to this action including legalfees ofthe Plaintiff’s Counsel fixed at Ghs 30,000.00to the Plaintiff not necessarily in termsofthe Ghana BarAssociationapprovedscale offees. c) That the Plaintiff is entitled to interest on the sum of Ghs 67,502.16 from the Defendant at the prevailing commercial bank rate from 5th June, 2020 until the date of final judgment 13 THEDEFENDANT’SCOUNTERCLAIM ISSUE2 Whether or not the Plaintiff owes the Defendant Ghs 440, 270.56 as commission the Defendant earned and expenses the Defendant incurred in supplying cashew nuts to the Plaintiff in the years 2019and 2020cashewseason The Defendant counterclaimed against the Plaintiff asfollows; 1. For an order of the Court compelling the Plaintiff to pay to the Defendant an amount of Ghs 440,270.56 being commission due the Defendant for the supply ofcashew nuts to the Plaintiff for the 2019 and 2020 cashew seasons, expenses incurred in supplying cashew nutstothe Plaintiff forthe 2020cashew season. 2. Interest on the amount stated in paragraph (a) supra from January 2019 till date of final payment. 3. Costs, and any otherrelief(s)the honourable Courtmay deemfit togrant In the case of Jass Company Limited & Another v. Appau & Another [2009] Supreme Court of Ghana Law Report (SCGLR) 265 at 265 the Court held in holding (1) as follows; 14 the burden of proof is always on the plaintiff to satisfy the Court on a balance of probabilities in an action for a declaration of title to land. Where the defendant has not counterclaimed, and the plaintiff has not been able to make out a sufficient case against the defendant, the plaintiff’s claims would be dismissed. Whenever a defendant also files a counterclaim, then the same standard or burden of proof would be used in evaluating and assessing the case of the defendant. In the instant case the defendant had counterclaimed and that means that they also assumed the position of plaintiffin respectof their counterclaim… The Defendant’s counterclaim against the Plaintiff is summarized in exhibit “11” where theDefendant claims as follows; 2019CASHEW SEASON(TOBE VERIFIEDBY ANINDEPENDENTEXPERT)  That he received an amount of Ghs 2,181,344.00 from the Plaintiff Company in the year 2019. I found Ghs 2,196.344.00fromexhibit “4”series.  That he supplied goods valued at Ghs1,887,291.00to thePlaintiff. 15 I found a difference of Ghs 294,053.00 between the money the Defendant received from the Plaintiff Ghs 2,181,344.00 and the value of goods the Defendant supplied to the Plaintiff Ghs 1,887,291.00.  The Defendant claims the total bags of cashew nuts supplied to the Plaintiff in the year 2019are4,973. I found 4,684bagsfromexhibit “4”series. There isadifference of289bagsofcashew.  The Defendant mentioned atotalnetweight of453,445. I do not know how he arrived at the total net weight. There is the need to engage an independent expert to assist the parties to explain this and the other variations clearly todetermine how much the Plaintiff owesthe Defendant  According to the Defendant, commission per kilogram of the cashew nuts is 0.70Gp and 0.70Gp multiplied by 453,445 is Ghs 301,411.00 as commission the Plaintiff owes him forthe 2019cashew season The commission figure will change because of the difference I found in the bags of cashew thatwassupplied and othervariationsabove. 16 2020 CASHEW SEASON (TO BE VERIFIED BY AN INDEPENDENT EXPERT / AUDITOR) The Defendant contendsthat in theyear 2020he received;  Ghs 1,236,575.00fromthe Plaintiff I found Ghs 1,071,575.00 in exhibit “5” series. The difference of Ghs 165,000.00 to be verified by anindependent expert/ auditor  Total value of goods the Defendant claims he supplied was Ghs 1,108,107.00. The difference between the money received and the goods supplied is Ghs 128,468.00 This should be verified and confirmed by anindependent expert/ auditor  The Defendant sayshe supplied totalbags of2,345cashew nuts tothe Plaintiff I found only 40 bags in exhibit “5” series . This must be verified by an independent expert/ auditor.  The Defendant claims net weight of201,628 This will change based ontheamount I found and thenumber ofbagsI found above 17  According to the Defendant, Commission per kilogram was 0.80Gp. Therefore 201,628 multiplied by 0.80Gp is Ghs 161,300.00 which is his total commission for the year 2020. This will also change because I found different figures and different bags of cashew otherthanwhat the Defendant claims.  The Defendant claims he deducted the Plaintiff’s balance of Ghs 67,502. 16 but it should not be deducted because I have granted the Plaintiff’s claim against the Defendant. This figure should be added to the amount the Defendant counterclaims foragainst the Plaintiff.  The Defendant claimed that two sacks at Ghs 3.58Gp multiplied by two is Ghs 7.16Gp asadditional commission.  The Defendant claims weight loss at 1.4kgatGhs 1.00multiplied by 2,345bags. I found only 40 bags so the figure will change unless it is established otherwise by an independent expert/Auditor fromthe receiptsthe Defendant tendered. 18  The Defendant stated thathis additional commissionis Ghs3,283.00.  Therefore,Ghs 161,300.00plus Ghs 3,283.00plus Ghs7.16Gp isGhs 164,590.16. Everything will change using the different figures I found in exhibit “5” series (To be verified by an independent expert /auditor) The Defendant claims thathis 2019commissionis Ghs 317,411.00. His 2020commission is Ghs 97,088.00. His totalshould be Ghs 440,270.56+Ghs 67,502.16=Ghs 507,772.72. As I indicated earlier that I have granted the Plaintiff its claim against the Defendant, that amount should be added to the Defendant’s claim against the Plaintiff. The differences I established from the receipts should also be taken into consideration to establish the actual debt the Plaintiff owes the Defendant strictly using only the receipts tenderedby the Defendant. Counsel for Defendant contends that per exhibit “4” series receipts and payment vouchers from the Plaintiff Company the Defendant proved that he used various sums 19 of money the Plaintiff gave him to purchase cashew nuts. Exhibit “4” series shows how many bags of cashew the Defendant supplied to the Plaintiff Company during the 2019 cashew season. Exhibit “1A” shows that the Defendant was to be paid commission of 0.70Gp per kilogram. Counsel argued that exhibit “5” series has the signature of the accountant Sadiq Batcha and the agreed commission is 0.80Gp which is evidence of the Plaintiff’s indebtedness to the Defendant in terms of commission for cashew nuts the Defendant purchased for the Plaintiff. Counsel argued that in the absence of proof by the Plaintiff that the Defendant’s commission in 2020 was paid, then the said commissionremains outstanding since the accountant fixed the commissionat 0.80Gp. It is important to state that although the Defendant signed most of exhibits “4” series and “5” series, Sidharthan Chelliah and Sadiq Batcha also signed some of the exhibits and the time the exhibits were generated are also indicated on the receipts which adds totheir authenticity.Ihave captured myfindings inthe formofatable below. 2019CASHEW SEASONACCORDING TORECEIPTSATTACHEDBY THE DEFENDANT No. Date AmountGhs Receipt No. of Kilograms Commission No. Bags 20 1. 19/1/19 6,539.00 3040 12 2kgs 0.70Gp 2. 21/1/19 23,820.00 3045 42 5kg 0.70Gp 3. 22/1/19 4,965.00 3252 8 - 0.70Gp 4. 26/1/19 8,505.00 3299 15 - 0.70Gp 5. 26/1/19 81,235.00 3302 21 - 0.70Gp 6. 28/1/19 9,571.00 3306 19 - 0.70Gp 7 28/1/19 55,595.00 3310 102 - 0.70Gp 8 31/1/19 1,699.00 3324 3 - 0.70Gp 9 1/2/19 16,376.00 3333 32 - 0.70Gp 10 1/2/19 36,720.00 3339 68 - 0.70Gp 11 1/2/19 38,315.00 3340 75 - 0.70Gp 12 4/2/19 154,470.00 3467 294 - 0.70Gp 13 8/2/19 185,671.00 1406 372 - 0.70Gp 14 8/2/19 29,859.00 1407 59 - 0.70Gp 15. 8/2/19 17,338.00 1412 32 - 0.70Gp 16 8/2/19 26,846.00 1413 52½ - 0.70Gp 17 18/2/19 82,000.00 1466 - - 0.70Gp 18 19/2/19 8,947.00 1467 20½ - 0.70Gp 19 11/2/19 68,855.00 1428 145 - 0.70Gp 21 20 11/2/19 114,481.00 1433 230 - 0.70Gp 21 20/2/19 53,011.00 1492 125 - 0.70Gp 22 20/2/19 21,013.00 Not 48½ - 0.70Gp Legible 23 22/2/19 13,883.00 3096 33 - 0.70Gp 24 24/2/19 74,222.00 2124 172 - 0.70Gp 25 24/2/19 71,247.00 2125 169 - 0.70Gp 26 26/2/19 88,950.00 2133 213 - 0.70Gp 27 28/2/19 127,146.00 3129 293.5 - 0.70Gp 28 3/3/19 51,131.00 3149 118 - 0.70Gp 29 8/3/19 25,036.00 Not 60 - 0.70Gp Legible 30 9/3/19 46,092.00 2444 109 - 0.70Gp 31 9/3/2019 5,452.00 2449 12 - 0.70Gp 32 12/3/19 63,840.00 2676 144 - 0.70Gp 33 14/3/19 98,845.00 2681 223 - 0.70Gp 34 14/3/19 51,572.00 2685 - - 0.70Gp 35 22/3/19 10,032.00 2728 23 - 0.70Gp 36 22/3/19 24,038.00 2729 54 - 0.70Gp 22 37 31/3/19 46,745.00 Not Bags - 0.70Gp Legible not legible 38 4/4/19 2,652.00 2662 119 - 0.70Gp 39 5/4/19 10,566.00 2678 31 - 0.70Gp 40 6/4/19 97,550.00 Not 306 - 0.70Gp Legible 41 11/4/19 11,996.00 2866 48 - 0.70Gp 42 13/4/19 7,496.00 2876 31 - 0.70Gp 43 18/4/19 19,457.00 1152 64 - 0.70Gp 44 16/4/19 6,572.00 2892 25 - 0.70Gp 45 18/4/19 27,382.00 1153 94 - 0.70Gp 46 24/4/19 15,504.00 1206 57 - 0.70Gp 47 26/4/19 11,116.00 1224 41 - 0.70Gp 48 26/4/19 10,468.00 1218 38 - 0.70Gp 49 29/4/19 5,989.00 1235 21 - 0.70Gp 50 29/4/19 8,729.00 1237 31 - 0.70Gp 51 29/4/19 11,891.00 1242 41 - 0.70Gp 52 2/5/19 12,716.00 2011 42 - 0.70Gp 23 53 6/5/19 19,872.00 2042 72 - 0.70Gp 54 7/5/19 13,928.00 2045 54 - 0.70Gp 55 9/5/19 30,031.00 3172 119 - 0.70Gp 56 11/5/19 13,367.00 3187 51 - 0.70Gp 57 23/12/19 15,000.00 0000421 - - 0.70Gp TOTALS 2,196,344.00 4,684 2020CASHEW SEASONACCORDING TORECEIPTSATTACHEDBY THE DEFENDANT No. Date Amount Receipt No.of Kilograms Commission No. bags 1 3/1/20 20,000.00 0000434 - - 0.80Gp 2 7/1/20 20,239.00 0000446 40 - 0.80Gp 3 7/1/20 15,000.00 Not - - 0.80Gp Legible 4 8/1/20 50,000.00 0003 - - 0.80Gp 5 9/1/20 47,336.00 0013 - - 0.80Gp 6 10/1/20 100,000.00 0017 - - 0.80Gp 24 7 21/1/20 50,000.00 0062 - - 0.80Gp 8 29/1/20 50,000.00 0096 - - 0.80Gp 9 4/2/20 100,000.00 0162 - - 0.80Gp 10 10/2/20 3,000.00 0165 - - 0.80Gp 11 13/2/20 100,000.00 0201 - - 0.80Gp 12 15/2/20 100,000.00 0208 - - 0.80Gp 13 18/2/20 100,000.00 0217 - - 0.80Gp 14 20/2/20 100,000.00 0233 - - 0.80Gp 15 28/2/20 100,000.00 0295 - - 0.80Gp 16 9/3/20 50,000.00 0347 - - 0.80Gp 17 13/3/20 30,000.00 0403 - - 0.80Gp 18 19/3/20 30,000.00 0430 - - 0.80Gp 19 26/3/20 1,000.00 0452 - - 0.80Gp 20 24/4/20 5,000.00 0516 - - 0.80Gp TOTALS 1,071,575 40 EXHIBIT“1”(ACCEPTED) The Defendant tendered exhibits “1”, “2” and “3” to establish that he worked with the Plaintiff during the 2018, 2019 and 2020 cashew seasons. Exhibit “1” is an agreement on purchase and supply of cashew nuts dated 14th February, 2018 between the Plaintiff on one part and the Defendant on the other part. The agreement was signed by the 25 Defendant as agent and Chelliah Sidharthan for the company. It was witnessed and signed for the parties. Exhibit “1” is a mutual agreement between the parties that the Plaintiff would provide funds to the agent to purchase cashew nuts from farmers and sell to the company. There are seven conditions in the agreement which the Defendant undertook to abide by including a condition that the market purchasing price of the cashew would be fixed and determined by the company and the agent should get prior approvalfromthe company before purchase fromthefarmers. This means that the Defendant could not in any way determine the market purchasing price and for that matter the commission on cashew nuts purchased without the Plaintiff’s approval. From exhibits “1” and “2” the Court found that the prices of the cashew are fixed by the Plaintiff. The Defendant testified that whether the prices change or not the company fixes the prices before the suppliers purchase. That when he was given power of attorney, he used to call the suppliers on behalf of his principal to update them on the current price at stake. The Plaintiff’s witness indicated that the commission is the difference between the delivery price and the producer price but they do not have fixed margins for commission because the producer price and the delivery price change but the price rangesbetween0.50Gp and Ghs 1.00. The Court is convinced in the light of the above that the Defendant did not conjure the prices that the Plaintiff owes him although the Court established some variations in the Defendant’s claims after reviewing exhibits “4” and “5” series. Per exhibit “1”, 26 purchasing and supply of the cashew nuts is to be done within three days after receiving money from the Plaintiff, unused jute sacks are to be returned to the company and accounted for.That should the agent fail to comply with the terms of agreement the Plaintiff reserves the right to take legalactionagainst the agent. The agreement however did not state how much money the Plaintiff gave the Defendant and the commission to be paid to the Defendant but that does not dispute the fact that there was a contract between the Plaintiff and the Defendant for the Defendant to supply cashew to the Plaintiff in the 2019 cashew season. The Plaintiff was served with this document and they only made a bare denial without challenging it with cogent evidence. In the Court’sview abare denialby the Plaintiff isnotsufficient. EXHIBIT“1A”(ACCEPTED) Exhibit “1A” dated 19th January, 2019 is similar to exhibit “1”. It was executed between the Plaintiff and the Defendant and signed by Sidharthan Chelliah the Plaintiff’s representative for Techiman branch and the Defendant. Kwame Daniel witnessed for the company and Osae Yaw Ebenezer witnessed for the Defendant. In this agreement the agent is to supply the cashew nuts within two days on receipt of money from the Plaintiff and the agreed commission between the parties is 0.70Gp per kilo of cashew nut supplied. The agent is supposed to be aware of changes of current prices based on the day, date and time and communicate same to the Plaintiff. This means that the change in price of the cashew nut is very critical and any such change is supposed to be 27 communicated to the Plaintiff by the agents to facilitate fixing of the market purchasing price. This reiterates the fact that the fixing of the market purchasing price and the commissionrequires theinvolvement ofthe Plaintiff who wouldpay the commission. According to Counsel for Defendant, the Defendant established his counterclaim with distinction and demonstrated that he worked for the Plaintiff in 2018, 2019 and 2020 to the trust and admiration of the Plaintiff such that the manager executed a power of attorney for him to act on his behalf and in the name of the company. Counsel noted that exhibit “1A” an agreement between the Plaintiff and the Defendant was signed by the manager of the Plaintiff Chelliah Sidharthan and the agreement stated the commissiontobe paid in paragraph(6). The Court takes notice of the variations in exhibits “1” and “1A” although both were signed by the same Chelliah Sidharthan and the Defendant but since the Plaintiff did not lead any evidence to raise doubts about the authenticity of the said exhibits except a bare denial of the Defendant’s counterclaim, the Court has no option than to consider them as authentic and as proof of the Defendant’s claim that he worked with the Plaintiff in the years2018and2019. EXHIBIT“1B”(DECLINED) Exhibit “1B” is doubtful because Chelliah Sidhartan could not have written a letter addressed tohimself andsigned by himself. 28 I would therefore notputany weight onthe contentof the said exhibit. EXHIBIT“2”SERIES (ACCEPTED) Exhibit “2” series, the Defendant’s Universal Merchant Bank (UMB) account statement dated 8th June, 2020 for the period 1st February, 2019 to 31st December, 2019 shows various cheque credits paid into the Defendant’s bank account with bank account number 0091428744018. According to the Defendant, the Plaintiff deposited the said money into his bank account andthe Defendant tendered exhibit “2”series toshow that he worked with the Plaintiff within the period. I have considered the statement and found several house cheque credits deposited into the Defendant’s bank account within the period with sums ranging between Ghs 9,758.00 and Ghs 500,000.00 but the statement is not clear about who deposited the money into the Defendant’s account. Counsel for Defendant in his written address in support of the Defendant’s claim stated that the Plaintiff deposited money into the Defendant’s UMB bank account. Exhibit “5L” clearly shows that on 10th February, 2020 an in house cheque number 000679 was deposited into Wisdom Nuts Ghana Limited account with GCB Bank perGreenlands Commodities Limited. The above deposits of money into the Defendant’s bank account by the Plaintiff which the Plaintiff did not challenge established that the Defendant had a working 29 relationship with the Plaintiff in the year 2020 and the Plaintiff deposited Ghs 150,000.00into the Defendant’sbank account. EXHIBIT“3”(ACCEPTED) Exhibit “3” is a power of attorney executed by Chelliah Sidharthan to the Defendant dated 9th July, 2019 to contest, defend or institute legal proceedings as he may think necessary and proper for the company and on its behalf in respect of any suit pending in any Court of law. This was not disputed by the Plaintiff as the Plaintiff’s witness admitted same under cross examination and stated that Sadat Chelliah Sidhathan was about to travel and there were some balances he was supposed to retrieve so he gave thepowerofattorneytothe Defendant. This further establishes a working relationship between the Plaintiff and the Defendant. EXHIBIT“4”SERIES (ACCEPTED) Exhibit “4” series from 19th January, 2019 to 23rd December, 2019 according to the Defendant are receipts of monies the Plaintiff gave to him at Ghs 2,181,344.00 and he supplied the cashew nuts but the Plaintiff did not pay him commission. Upon reviewing exhibit “4” series all dated 2019, I found that some of the receipts were signed by Chelliah Sidharthan whereas others were not. However, the Plaintiff did not 30 object to the tendering of the receipts and in spite of the fact that Chelliah Sidharthan did not signsome ofthe receipts; I have no reason to believe that the said receipts were conjured by the Defendant and I would therefore accept them. I have used my findings in exhibits “4” and “5” series to argue supra in respect of the Defendant’s claim against the Plaintiff per exhibit “11”. FUELPURCHASED(ACCEPTEDWITHVARIATION) The Defendant claimed that in the year 2020 he incurred a debt of Ghs 25,771.56 in the course of supplying cashew nuts to the Plaintiff. He tendered fuel receipts exhibit “6” series dated between 16th January, 2020 and 4th April, 2020 with different vehicles including car numberAS 2062–10 andAS 9502– 14bothvehicles appear onexhibit “B” tendered by the Plaintiff’s witness. The Defendant purchased fuel at different fuel stations including Dukes, Engen, Frimps Oil Company Limited among others all summed up to Ghs 1,940.73 instead of Ghs 5,300.56 claimed by the Defendant. The Plaintiff did not raise any objection to other vehicles used apart from vehicles stated in exhibit “B” and therefore the Court would accept them. Although some of the receipts werenotsigned bythe station attendants, it is notastrangeoccurrence. TheDefendant is thereforeentitled to Ghs 1,940.73forfuelinstead ofGhs 5,300.56. MAINTENANCEOF TRUCKS (EXHIBIT“6E”DECLINED) 31 The Defendant stated that he undertook maintenance on trucks that he used in supplying the cashew nuts to the Plaintiff. Exhibit “6E” shows the vehicle numbers including the two vehicles on exhibit “B” featuring once again on a Goil Service station receipt with dates the vehicles were purportedly sent for maintenance at the said station and the amount involved. However, the nature of maintenance that was done on the said vehicles are not stated and there is not a single signature on the said exhibit. Rather amounts are written in the signature column. The Defendant’s name and the name of the Plaintiff Company are on the receipt and a total amount of Ghs 3,359.83 is statedas thetotalexpenses without any signaturetoauthenticate the amount. Exhibit “6E”is clearly self -serving and therefore the Court would not put any weight on it and would accordingly refuse the Defendant’s counterclaim in respect of the said exhibit. Notwithstanding the fact that the Plaintiff did not raise objection to the receipts the Defendantis expected to prove his counterclaim. EXHIBIT“7”SERIES (ACCEPTEDWITHVARIATION) Exhibit “7” series forms part of the expenses incurred on maintenance of vehicles that the Defendant claimed on vehicle numbers AS 2062 – 10 and AS 9502 – 14. They are 8 receipts in all with various dates in February2020.Allthe receipts were signed by either the customer and the manager, or the manager alone or the customer alone. The nature of maintenance are stated on the receipts which convinces the Court that the said 32 maintenance were done on the said vehicles. The Court would therefore accept the said receipts except one dated 15th February, 2020 with some interlineations on it. The Court further rejects the figure for the fourth item on the receipt dated 13th February, 2020. With the receipt dated 22nd February, 2020, the Court ignored the totals and calculated the figures in the amount section because of the interlineations and inconsistencies in thetotalfiguresonthe receipt. In the circumstance the Court would grant the Defendant the cost of seven of the receipts which sum up to Ghs4,431.00instead ofGhs 4,581.00. EXHIBIT“8”(ACCEPTED) Exhibit “8” series on payment of staff shows receipts of various sums of money paid to Asay Bakamba, Driver, Samuel Bakamba, driver, Opoku Yaw Martin, driver, and Kinsley Adjei Secretary. The said persons were paid amounts ranging between Ghs 500.00 and Ghs 1,500.00 as being payment for cashew working, loan, monthly salary, salary advance between 18th February, 2020 and 30th April, 2020. The receipts were signed by the recipients and the Defendant and the time is stated on the receipts. The total amount is Ghs 10,557.00. The Plaintiff did not lead any contrary evidence to dispute the Defendant’sclaim. I thereforegrantthe Defendantthe Ghs10,557.00as claimed. EXHIBIT“9”(ACCEPTED) 33 Exhibit “9” series being chits from theAssemblies are reasonable expenses that could be incurred by the Defendant in the course of purchasing cashew nuts for the Plaintiff. These are receipts of payment for carting the cashew from Nkoranza, Busunya, Kintampo to Techiman between 6th February, 2020 to 18th March, 2020 in the sum of Ghs 643.00. I grantthe DefendantGhs 643.00as claimed. EXHIBIT“10”(DECLINED) Per exhibit “10” the Defendant claims he paid loading boys but the Court finds it too vague. The Defendant should have given further and better particulars as he did in paying salary and giving loans to staff. He submitted only one receipt dated 25thApril, 2020. The Court holds the view that the amount of Ghs 4,690.00 was not paid in a day and even if it was paid in a day, at least the names or number of loading boys that were paid should have been stated on the receipt. Since the Defendant knew he would claim the amount from the Plaintiff. I find this receipt as self – serving and althoughthe Plaintiff did notchallenge it, I decline it. Counsel for Defendant argued that in addition the Defendant incurred expenses including maintenance of trucks, loading fee, fuel, money paid to staff and workers recruited by the Defendant in purchasing and delivering the cashew to the tune of Ghs 25,771.56 which the Plaintiff has refused to pay. Counsel stated that the documents 34 tendered by the Defendant in respect of expenses were not objected to by the Plaintiff and the said documents are not the Defendants own document as claimed by Counsel for Plaintiff that the Defendants exhibits “1” – “12” are his own documents. According to Counsel for Plaintiff, the Defendant obtained the documents from the Plaintiff Company, bodies, agencies and individuals or businesses he dealt with. Those documents arepresumed tobe regularunless otherwise proven. The values I have given is based on what I reviewed from the exhibits notwithstandingCounsel for Defendant’s intimations above. EXHIBIT“11”(ACCEPTED) The Defendant’s counterclaim against the Plaintiff is summarized in exhibit “11”. In the Court’s view exhibit “11” and all other exhibits the Defendant tendered are not self – serving as claimed by Counsel for Plaintiff except those that I have found as such. The claims in the said exhibits are verifiable as I have discussed with exhibits “4” and “5” series above. I have observed some differences in the figures indicated by the Defendant in terms of cash received, cashew bags supplied among others which does notaffect thevalidity and authenticity ofthesaid exhibits. 35 EXHIBIT“12”(ACCEPTED) The Defendant’s claim for additional commission is captured and discussed in exhibit “12”, two receipts dated 3rd January, 2020 in the sum of Ghs 7.16p and 25th April, 2020inthe sum ofGhs 3,283.00. I hereby grant the Defendant the total sum of Ghs 3,290.00 in the absence of contrary evidence by the Plaintiff. EXHIBIT“13”(DECLINED) Regarding exhibit “13”, dated 31st July, 2019, the Defendant claimed that Chelliah Sidhartan issued it to him and that it is a cheque but he could not withdraw it for unexplainable reasons. Counsel for Defendant noted that the Plaintiff knew of its indebtedness of Ghs 317,411.00 to the Defendant that is why Chelliah Sidharthan issued a cheque in July 2019 to acknowledge it. Counsel argued that following the Plaintiff’s failure tocall their material witnesses Chelliah Sidharthan and Sadiq Batcha to rebut the Defendant’s evidence concerning his commission and expenses, the Court should hold inthe Defendant’sfavourfor thereliefs claimed in his counterclaim. I would not belabour the point regarding this exhibit. I disagreewith the Defendant and his Counsel that it is a cheque. I however agree with Counsel for Plaintiff that it is a savings withdrawal form and not for clearing in spite of the inscription “security 36 cheque” on it. It is glaringly written on the face of exhibit “13” that “Savings withdrawal form, for cash onlynot for clearing.” The Courtholds the view thatif the Defendant claims that it is a cheque, why has he not withdrawn the money? He claims he could not do so forsome unexplainable reasonswithout telling theCourtthe said reasons. The Court will not put any weight on it although it is said to have the signature of Chelliah Sidharthan.Itdoesnotguarantee the Plaintiff anything in the Court’sview. CONCLUSION In the light of the foregoing, the Court is of a considered view that on the balance of probabilities the Defendant established his counterclaim against the Plaintiff. Consequently, the Court holds in favour of the Defendant for his counterclaim against thePlaintiff subject tomodifications tohis claims stated above. (a) Consequently, the Court hereby orders the Plaintiff to pay to the Defendant the amount to be established in respect of the Defendant’s reliefs against the Plaintiff being commission due the Defendant for the supply of cashew nuts to the Plaintiff for the 2019 and 2020 cashew seasons, expenses incurred in supplying cashew nuts to theplaintiff forthe 2020cashew season asdiscussed above. 37 (b) Interest on the amount stated in paragraph (a) supra from January 2019 till date of final payment. (c) Cost ofGhs30,000.00is awardedin theDefendant’sfavour Since the Plaintiff succeeded on its claim and the Defendant succeeded on his counterclaim, let the Plaintiff set offits claim against theDefendant’scounterclaim. (SGD) JUSTICEJOYCE BOAHEN HIGHCOURTJUDGE 25TH FEBRUARY2025 38