Ghana Building Contractors vs Cooper Motors Corporation Ltd (Civil Case No. 4 of 1989) [1990] TZHC 464 (9 October 1990)

w\c- -;:> -~ I /~ .. J1-r 11HE: ITIGH .COUR'I1 . OF - 'JllJIZAlHA < AT l\ffi..:.,""'Y A CIVIL· C.llSD WOo 4· OF 1989 i' t·, . I·< GIL'UTA° IllJILJ)'DJG COi~'IBACTORS. o o, o., o., o o o o, e o o o oai. .- o PLJ.TIJTI.t<":F · V3RSUS COOPTI11 1~IOTORS-: CORPOf,.ATI(]J LT.D., 0000000000000000

r •.• DIJF.i.ill.IDA1'1"T Mchome J..e ,,. 0 JDG:;::J!lilllNT \ ·,r, /' ~ '" The plaintiff, M/s Ghana J3uildins Contractors is a building construction firn · as their 112,J.:-ie SU{;':30sts, based in lVTIXlya 0 Tho defendant, . •,: CooperaWe8 Corporation, deal i1 motor vehicle sr.lcs~ service an~ repairL based in Dur es Salaam 1vith branches e,11 over the coU1?-try, incluclill[;' here in Mbeya. The plaintiff owGs a fleet of notor vehicles, i_n%f which is a Landrover 110 Registration No. r.IZ 95309. The plantiff is a regular . . . . customer of the defendn.nt., TJ.1.,1,t is -the fo:i:-r.1er used rcC"UlnJ.'ly to send to the latter motor vehicles for service and rep::-.,irs,, It is alle[s'Gcl in tl1e plaint thc.t· on 9/1/89 :t10 plo.intiff sent l1is above-mentioned vehicle to_ the defendant for service -and 1:-iinor repc:..irs and wc..s to be i1r;1.,nded tack the vc!1icle on the sc.ne dc:70 Eut the def'Einda.nt tl1ro¼.5'.:.1 ne:).igence of his- 01.1J,Jlo~-00s nado the plaintiff 1 s vehicle cutch . - ' - .' . fire nnd thus delayed it I s repair. a:nd hC!,11dir1B. over· to t110 plaintiff for 22 dnysc, Dv.rin,:-s tis tiL1e 1rhen his vehicle was in the .defondc:.nt 1 _s _ custoc.y tho plaintiff h::.':.d. to hire nnotb,er yehiqlo f:rom n/s l':'lkom)Jozi Auto __ qar1[,-e .. t ,·. 96, 000/ = per c1..::i,y O When l1is ve1icle was on t}1e :road and in his use e used to spend 43,000/;:: in l'Ul'!.n:i.ng it. ile now clnins t:1e cliffe:i:once i.ea 53 1 000/= per day for the loss of the use of .1is r.1otor vehicle TZ 95309 .for 22 days vrhich eg_uals to shso :1,t66·,6g9i'."', . oos.ts 1 interst at.'.12% and any other · relief whic.i."1. tho court will deer f:1.i° and just., -'- _ . ·: . .• . . . . / • .... : Tho def?ndant in h_i,s wri ten_ saer.1e1t of efnce denis to ho.V9 delayed fr.(-;ci~~iring the pi~i11ti:ff' s ~~l1ile. .Nor docs_ 110 a.d.rii t to have:. throutsh nc{iE,Dnce :r otherwis; ,;ad;· ti1·plnint,iff S: vel1-icle catch fi:i:eo T1ue defendant alleeu{ to have pi;ed the said. vehicle on the,· SqJ".10( do,;· _: •OM: • • • < • O ••• ;• • • O • : :••• • •,, • ••• • :• •' • • ' :, but the plaintiff failed to collect it. By way of .countor-clni.11 the_· . . ' . defendant ciains_ storage chf:.I'GGS for .50 .days at the ra.to of shso 30,oOo/= per day''i°.·0.-·1,500,000/.,;. Tho defendant. clins also costs of· this s1rit, interest at 12% and e..ny other reliefs tlle court shall deem ;fit and. justo To prove their case the.plaintiff cc11lec. six witnosseso The first one is a cextain Mr. Asobenye Malsuko.. He is the director of tl:o plaintiff firno He told this court that he sent his r;10tor vehicle i> ..,/2

2 TZ 95309 o;.1 9/1/fJ9 to t].1e defend11.,.-..,t for ser-vicc cmc1- n:J.s to collect it on tho s2,;;10 day o When !10 wont to oo llo ct it in t~:10 .'.:>fto:e-noon of the 03.:10 da,y he found it burned. Pif 0 I wrote ther,1 to hc:,nd. l:.ia 1 :,aok !1is Liotor vehicle but t:'J.c defenc.:c .. nt's 1:1G,nc.gcr told then to wa.it for 'their- ~Gnc1 quo.rtors 1 decisiono T'ue pk,intiff. tllon filo"d thiz suit for cln.r.1C1.:,,-os fo:c loss of use of ::..is vchicleo Them tho dcfcndu.nt 1rr.oto tho j_)ltciniff a lotter that t:!J.o v0!1iclo WD,S rendyo Tho.:t lettm. was tendered in court e.s E::::l1i½it A,daed 16tll Much, 1989 This:}oti;er wo..s to tho o.ffoct t:_1J.t tho plaintiff's vehicle was repaired on tho sane dn.y, 9/1/89 r.,nd. t!10.t the dcfe- ndr.mt never dni.:10,g-ed tho vehicle. It c6ntn.iiis loo ·o.. notice -bh::- .. t -tho plaintiff WGS to colict his ve].1icle or stort ✓ ,sO chC,l'(})S c .. t· 30, 000/== per dn.y woulcl a,ccrue furthero PWciI oi'tor receiving t;~iis lotter wont to tlle defendant's gCJ..'n.ge i·rith avohiclo inspector, ~leIII todas:-,,oct the vob.icloo PWoIII inspected t:.10 vo:dclc c..ncl prepo..red a r0port which wr.s tonc1.0rod in• court o.s Ex.1il)it J3o · TJ.10 report in brief states thc,t the v0:,.icl0 l1t..cl cav.ght fire ·0.::14 °;Ju:rnod t:10 l)onnot,c.ir cleaner hose, bcrbora.tor top covor,and earth wire. ,?.if oI took tho. _yc1icle on 17/3/89. Ile J.'O turned it 4 days lo. tor for .He took it rock again on 4/ 4/890 Ifo now clnJ.ms ti . • -- ·, different dofoctso 53, ooo/ = por · day froii1, 10//p9 to 4/ 4/89 w!1on ho took bn.ck tho ,.rehiclo for goodo PiT o II, Gcor ,Mwcikonco told tlis court lK: us0cl to uoJ.'lc for tho defo- ~ ndant cornpQ.ny a:::: o. oechcmiC:. liut hc.s now 1x,an disnissed.' IIo is t10 one w!10 wa.s hded tho ·p1c.intiff' s co.r to rep;".,ir., Th:rcug.:.1 his negligence tho vohiclo cnught fii'El ::inc"'.. tl16\mxt day he was fired, l)JT tho dofendo..nt . fr,oill the "job. ,·P.l.,IlI; as t sa,id elJor is tho vehicle inspcctoro TT • .a0 lS -a m0clmnics foroE1.on iri-Uj0nzi Ivibeya., Ho told tl1is cowt that·. ha smr- tho ! '. . p't;'- sho1v1i'1ri .-1is vehicie inspection rcport,Exhit,it B 9 to lmvo ::c0;ucht- ·:-: . . fi::re·. T'.u.e defendant' S bran.ch rn1ru,i,gcr "ancl workshop manager t1Clr.:ittecl befor0 hfo tl1.:l.t tho plaintiff's vehicle · h[i.cl · co.ue·ht fi:;:·o t:w.·out,Cj1 bn.clluck · and t;ic,t they would repl11ca tho burned wires.:· PWoIII C1d.vis0d thnt the·.-. · vehicle should i.1ot woik t~_ll'tlje ·burned wires wore r0_placod •. PWorv, Patrick LGlTleck; a private wotor electriciru1 told this court that on _28/3/8'9 he wa.,s·,:askod by tho :.tlicn branch r;1arn:.',ger of tho defondm1t to go and repc.ir the wires of t'ho 1,laintifft s vcl1iclo .c.ncl was pnid 500/=•

• ... i. :. ' .• ·.:· J,.·-: .1 •• ·1 f) •• ·- '-. ~-- •• . r,.:; :..., ..

3 J?W aV, So..idi Masudi I,,I·wu-Do,nda is t).1..0 owne:;,• of I 1 Tirnn;)ozi• D::-.1°1:_,rrc.· He told -f• •• this court :j_s notor ve:.:i.icle, V, L.anclrov01•,Sl10:rt O.l1t1-ssiE:' WQ.S -1ir0cl. by'. t:.1e plcintiff f1:or:i 10/1/89 to lc-,te Lp:ril 1989 c..t 96fooo/=· pe:r dy. · Up to when he gave evicenco he had not yet boo pid ~ single cent for his car J.1ire. PW• VI, :Io1:1odi Alru.m is n, driver : ocrployod by the plaintiff o He was driving tl:e v-c1icl0 in clisLJute, TZ 95309. He told t:.lis court ho sent the s2.id vo1iclo to Cooper Hotors for ·2op2,iJ? but w11en 116 wont to collect it it hniLbeon bm··ned. He went to ir1forw PW ,I 3,rJ.c!. the lc;ttor gave hil.1 another notor vo::dclo, Q, L,mdrovor llJhort Chassis, property of M!.CODl)OZi Garage to· drive for t}1reo r.aonths before tl1e 110 returned froL1 tho gr.J:-n,eco Ho -ivent five ti.Lles to soc _if tho 110 was rnc.dy but wo..-s tole. it was 110to And. tho dofonco hGd two liitmsscs. DWoI, on0 Fe:rd.ina.nd JG.cob Mb.t:6111 is tho dofendru1.ti s wo:rks1op i.1Gn."{,'0i'o Ire told this· cow..·t tbnt on 9/1/89 · they :..·eceiv9d r:rz 95309 fron the- plaintiff for generr,l service c.nd mninto..iru:mco and were to return it on tho G:J.:'.10 da.yo They oponecl n job cr:.rd for the co.r, EX:b.i1.1i t Dl a Tho co.r .ws . Joxsired on tllo so.me clv.,y but dos pi t0 be inc phoned to collect it the plaintiff die. not turn up to collect tl10ir car. Instead on 10/1/89 the plaintiff co □ J:)lainecl in lT.i. 0 itinc1 tlmt tlle defendox1t hcil 1Ju:rnod tJ-1.0 plaintiff's ccxo T1.u.e dofom:o.,nt Sl1,w their nC..vooa.to who wrote the :pla,intiff on 16/3/89 tho..t · tb.o~ 1 would ckiD stora,co o).1c:rg-cs for tho plnin-tiff 1 .s. failure to oolloot t~:.oir· car~ Tl.mt lotto:• is E:lc1ibit A for . · . the plaii1tiff •. :T'.u.e followine clay 17/3/89 the plaintiff co.mo· o.,nd received their r.1otor vehicle in eood · 01•doro On 21/3/89 vehicle for· ropo.,ir of the wator ga:ugo n.n took !· ~ . second ropo.ir JJ.acl nothing to do vii th· tho first tl:o pl0,intiff rotu:mcd t:10 it agn.in on 4/Ll/39/: Tliis . ono of 9/1/890 DW .I denies to, ho.,vo told Pl'T 0 6 tht- he plaintifft s car' llad ca,t:i.eht fi:r0 0 Ho denies too to :ii:,,ve po.id PWo5, the elootricin.n 500/= for ropc.irine · ... · the wiring systcn of t:10 plaintiff* s ·vehiclco DWeIIg Loon De Souza. told this cou:rt·· thd.t he roiJ.dtostocl t10 notor ·vehicle on 4/ 4/890 It lmd boon br9iht with water @3LU[;o pro1)lor.:so Two iss:uos woro frnnod at thl-oogili.nine; ·of this hor.ri-ngo · They aro:-. ( 1) Whether the defend1t nec;ligcntly dnn¾d the plaintiff's . notor vehioloc · (2) To whn.t reliefs arc tho parties entitledo · Tl1e plaintiff's case on ti10 first issue ·,iei::thr.t tho defond::-nt h.rrnod tho vehicle through tho nec;liGOnco of his uorkoi•., TJ.:-..o wo:d-cer, PW 0II, told tllis court ho wa,s re:p<?-1!-'inc the l)lc.intifff s vol:iolc an.cl through his nccliecnce it oaugl1t fire mid PW .II was snaked frrn:1 the job by tho dofondnnto PW oIII Mr. Kina.r;ibo is tho moho..nirol fo:rem,n in Ujenzi., He inspected the plaintiff's veb.icle and :1is ro1Jort is tl1::1.t tl..i.c ve1icle cot burned on t!1e bonnet~ cd.r clcn.nor hoso 9 oa.rl,o:;:_,::,,tor top cov.c1~ and 02,rth wi.re 9 a.':long ot::.or :parts. E:i.s report wc.,s tond01'.JCl n,s Exl.1ibi t Bo

~ .-.- -~ 4 Tho dofondGJJ.t donie:;; to l::.rwo burnocl t:.10 plrtintiff' s ootor voiicl0. 'E.1cy 0.110cc PW eII w0,s clisnissed for 1Jurnin.:;: c,not:10r vo:iclo t.ncl not tho pl2iintiff' s. Defence counsel r.tro Bc..toyunga sul;ni ts that the Ve}:icl0 Inspector sI1oulcl not l)G tolicveao Ho is c. 6 ovor:nnont onployoo 9 ;yet )10 inspects privnte vchicloso PWoII 9 h0 c.reuos 9 i·s ly'.i.1:c becv..uso i'-ie was .disr.1iss0c:. by .t210 cofendcnt. rnr o.:I: also donj_os tl1:1t Filo 5 was once· given :Wil'ing work to ·clo for t:10 ):)lo.intiff' s v0hiolo e,d )icl 500/;,o . Tlc Dei•o fo..6t th3,t :P,·;.,n; was clist1i:Ssod by t!:o defoi:'1fu:mt fro □ the job ··:·:·· . · .. ~ ,• . . is not .Proof t1mt P.W II is lyinc;. · PvT ,,II sys. 10 i tl10 · one viho•·"t-ras on 9/1/ 890 ; The ·c1.o:fe'ndc,nt did not assigned . . . .: •• 1' . . .. • ·• ; . ·, .' ; .. q, w~ tnos. any othor :-:icchanic to testify tl10,t ho is· tho dho ·vrl10 w0,s a.ssi1;ned . ' . . . . . . l . . ,, . • • to repair tho plaintiff's vchiclo and not PW.n;· I find. therefo:re on t:.ie . bale.nee of prorobili ties tlmt PW.ir 'is tho one wlio was assigned to repcir •·• I • :•, tho plaintiff's vohicloo · :i:for d.o I agree wit11 the learned counsel fcir tho defentl.r,nt' s sul:>mission that PW .III should. not 1::0 l)olioved as :10 is o, . r · Comworks M0ch;J,nic but. wcs l1ired to inspect a privcte ;J.otor vehicle. ' .:· :.• The counsel argued .that . b, trn,ffic policno..n should have inspected tho vehicle :rcther th:in PWoIII~ Thero .. is :r:io ta1)oo in a e;overnncnt nocmnic· insp0ctine a privnto cox·• I therefore fincl no reasons to hold th0,t PvTci'III is ·lying. . ., ,.. . . ,. Thon the.re is f., yo He told this oou-r.:'t he wc1s ]'l.i:rocl to ropair hll'nod wires of tho pl::inti:f;t'. 1 ~~ ve:1iclo "Jy tl1e foroor 'brc.noh r.1ann..s"0r of the . . . -:'! . . , dcfendc,nt cor.[)C.llYo UnfoJ'.'tur1c1tely nei t:1J.oi· ,tb.o plo,j_ntiff nor the defonck.,nt cr..lled that ex-r:irnmgor to Give eviclm1coo· mr.r 111loces ·t1r,,t PW.,V was not pnid 1 but DWoI is a works10p. 1x·,n...-;,,sor nhcl potty p::-.y:ncnt .. s like· these of 500/= ccn ensily lJG. Dc,c,lo 1::y the cr,,n...'LGOr- or 11ccountn.nt without tb.o wrkshop mannger' s knowledge. I fincl no good reaf:1on therefo+·o to clisbelievo that ,L l'Wo V repaired tho wires and was pi'id 500/ =o · ' .. The defonoo ::l.I'6Ues ,tl,iat thoy serviced t:10 plo.intiff Is vehicle on ,~ . . . tho sane day and did not burn it., But on 10/1/89 when tlle plaintiff

• . . . .,1 ·wrote ther:.1 a letter that they hrul burned thoi:r vo!liclo tho dofcndn.nts sent t>e lotter to their heo.dquo.,:rters for decisiono · Hru:l t10 dofendcnt not burned t:.10 plcdntiff 1 s vehicle whe tho plaintiff wroto tho lotter ; containing suc!1 false allegations iristond of sendinc; tho lot'tor to t)J.0ir hoadq_u.c:.rters in Dn.r-es-Salcar; for decision, tho dofondcnt boill{; in such . good torr:1s Hi t!1 ,tho pla:i:ntiff'>would hove 00,llecl the plaintj_ff and sho°t'm him . - !" . . .tho vehicle in n, perfect. tu11:r(l_-rnocl .condi tiono Or if tho plaint"iff l)y I .. ' wr.itinc such a lotter hoo. t\n'llod into J. crook ov0I"-:1ic~~1t t~-;.0 defend.nut would hb.ve written t).100 o collect their v91iclo im.'lod'iafoly or face ,-,_·:

.. storo.Gu ·c:.11:-i'e,us clo.,ia on 10/1/89 0,ncl n.ot on· 1~/ 3/89 s shmm in I:}C.1i1Ji t A. 'E·{o G.ri3ULK.i":ht is to ·w1on tlO :-lc..intifi S vci-:iclo wc;s: -xoe,c..y for collec- tion ·:pplies nut::-,t:i.s ;:mt;:,,nc 1 .is to bot:: t~:-.o ·f'irst nm1. soconcl issues. T:.10 clo:fona;:mt ares·uos tl·:.::,,..t t:-.:.-3 plo.i:qtiff 1 S veiiiclo wo.s ro2.r1~~ on tb.0 snno dC1.y i.co . :)3/1/89 but ta.o plaintiff. of }.,js, own fr0e will roft,-,.socl to or)lloct ito .. . . ' . . ]3oo£in:; in :.lind· tho {;'Ooc1. lx:1blo thc.t tho plcintiff roJ.::;t,io}hfp l10 1),:.rtios ;-_::-,d I fincl it qui to ir::p:ro- 1-r.od rft{so, tci' cblloct ::ds j'.lOW CC.I' i, :::.10r:ic,toly it ,.! . ' .. L,': .. w::s sorvicocl., Furthcr-1JQro t]1::i job 6.d or R.opnir .Order (EY...:li::it Dl) wllilo . sliowing t]w,t tho cc.r WQ.s to be _rqpc.irda.-: "toc:ty'', 9/1/G9, it wa.s chocked r.nd tested ;md si01od b;:,r ono D' Souzci. o 15/ 3/b9/· ::Ic..d · it bcGn rc:-:-..dy for collection on tho sru:1c da,y I find no ror..son why Ex:1·iibi t Dl wr.s sicnecl t12.t it wns tested cmd chocked on 15/3/89 •... For those rec.sons tho ref ore I find tho,t 'tho . ."clofondr;nt tb.roUGh l10G;ligcri-Co.· dn.J:::.f,Ud tho plciiniff' s ve1iclo ·1)y fireo ., '}._s for t).10 socond issue. t:e cn.r vms colloctod, on 17/3/89 as both pc.,rtd.es .. . n,groo a.t1cl it wc,.s delayed bGc::mse of t:10 defcn-i.~~~t 1 s noGlie,"0ntly lmndling it :"\fn it einw;ht fire'. 0,s I h11ve fund outo Tho dofoncl1:ntts countor-cl.:d.n for ·storac:c ch=-rGOs thorof oro h:,s no basis c.nc'.. is her0 by clis11issed • . 'Tl10 ].J'lcintiff is _ontitleci. to dCLlJCL;;Gs' for loss oc.i.:1J3Gfl ·by t:.10 clofGnci.c:nt' S ::·sorv\nt's negl:t[tence., I !.lO,v-0 fotind tllcLt (;_UE) to tl1o·c1.oi-.mclnntts mcliconco . . ', . t)o :plo..intifft s vehicle skroc:. in tho defo11cli1.i'1t' s · ccrc..co fro □. 10/1/89, to 17/3/89., It was rcturnocl on 21/3/89 '-i.:>ut I on conviricocl on-tho 7x·.lrn1c0 of probc.bilitios tlnt-_this wc.s for other ro:p:,,irs to wH,tllo wo.tcr ge:ugoo Tl1c plr,intiff r.llec;G_s to l1ei,v0 hirocl 0,not!1or vcl:icle for uso ct '96 9 00/= per cby o Tio usec;. to s,oncl o.1)out 43 9 000/~ 11er clny- waon usiTI{,; :1is own ve1icle. ]low lie clo.,ins t:10 bo..lcilce of 53, 000/= fro::.1 10/1/8<; tHl · 1-(:-.on the veb.i,clo wc.s lmndocl "b2.ck to llli.lo T'.o clof.:J;lcL:mt c;,.."!'(;uos_ thr.:.t tl:q,t c-::mnt is too oxb.01~ 1 )i tant 0 ,, A car :1irod on dc.ily DJ.sis is. c;:,::.rc;ecl .:11:,out 8, 000/=, t'..10 defence c.reuoso Tho -::hurcl-on of proof lies on tho plc.intiff to prove tha.t 110 hixod PW. V 1 s vo!1iclo for _96,::800/= po1~· ~cW o.nd if t:.mt bUI"don is disc?.1c:..I\3'0d tho court has to docicle wb.otl1or tlmt o..t1ount is r6nson::1Jloo I3esiclos PW.I's own tGstinony to the 0ffect that ho hired o. vohicie at 96, 000/= per do.y t10 plaintiff cc.Hod PWo V, SA]J)I Ml':..SlJ1>I MWli.WuIDA, the owner of t:.1e hired whicloo PW o V issued 2Xl invoice ~";_nnoxturo B to tho pln.int for cln.ir.1s of tl10 chc.rgos a.t 96 9 000/= per dc.y fro □ 10/1/89 to 31/1/890 T'..1ore o.ro lots of controoictiore r:mcl discr8pc.ncios on tho plnintiff' s case on this issue which ct.ko·iJo·fincl on the 1:lo.l:mco of probn.bilities that PWoI nay not ha.VG l1irod F'w.V's vo:1iclo at a.11. eo•/6 JI

!; ' ~ "·· •>r•• ,:.,•. '.'I((; p.•-: ~ ,. .. ,, :,"' 6 'TI.1os0 ccutr".,(.ictio:o.f.3 ., • .._-. .- • ("I --,, .. )~ '"'11'1 • r"'\C--. ... .., ... .1: l.-"-'.:;'.O.!. ._., )(...,.i.-Cl.v ,..:, 2.rc t=-t w'. .. ilo t'..:o iwoico \ c.nnoxtv.rc "D" to t::o l)lo..int is for 1 .J.ir,inc t'..10 voiiclc fro:·.:· 10/1/89 to· 31/1/89. F:~ oI · cli-ii,=i. :;,,f :1i1c1. it· frcD 10/1/89 to 4/ 4/090 'l'llon PH o V sc:.ys 1is yolclo we:.s ,21frocT fior.: :-10/1/89 t t:.10 oncl. of. ,."..pril, ·19890 Fil ,.I t!10 Director of t'..19 plo.intiif' co:1pcmy s2.ys l'·:(f"(loOs 'not' bow tho rocistrC'.-tion ,, ~ 8.' -~ ' ' . n ,,•· 1 '"'.,.,"' of t'·--- -ro'-c'lo h,-,,· 1 ··i·-,-_c1'·"'roo rn.r· V -m-7 I "'"'-r<" '·o i'T"S f•,r..11·11,, -"( 1 ,I.A!.-.t,1'-'.J.O .. :...; V• .,J.. __ ..., •.• J.v .i .1. rv,o .. L. O t,;J..,..,JtJ . ·. (...., 1..t. ---;.:) 1,..:,,-.:.i t. sory:ici:'lc t'..10 V:J\iclc' 10·:_:;.irocl w:.1ilo PvToV sews :.o (F\ToV) WQS sorvicinc ito Tho contro..clictions encl discropnncios · in t\0 cr.:so ._of 0110 ::x'..:rty · thct pc,ity's credibility. It is q\i.ito prol.;.:.blo thorofo:co t,-~~t t,o plcdntifi' j'L1St 0skocl PW.,V to writo !-::.ii:1 C!. fictiti:...Invoicoo clostroy ' . . w I have e,lso soon a m.ir:bor of m'n-i.ors of vo:·_iclos of t;·w typo end . ! .. . . ca.pacity of tho 0110· t10 pl::-..intiff c,llogos to 1.:.·wo > .. iroc.e r'.Ioat of t!,on foc,rocl to cor.10 o..ncl testify in coiu-t on· t:is fi:.ict but ono of t.01 sworo ..,.,., 1... .. J. ... o.,fficlcwi t 1coforc r.10 ( Court D:::::libi t 11 :._ 11 ) under Orclor XIX :2.ulo 1 of t::c Civil • in .,. . · Proc0c:1.u0 Codoo Jo clicsroczit 't-o;t;' vehicles cro hirocl for 2,Jout 7,000/= por tky in town 0-nt 25, ooor= to ot:,'~~tc.lit;cis in _t--is :J.oGion c.nd 30, 000/= to Irin.::;o,o It is oNious t!12,t 96,000/= poi· ,l,y- is too irlflo..tod o. fif,'Ul'Oe Tl10UG'.1 I ::e,ve found t:ic,t it is probnblo tl'.c:.t t:10 pl:i;::.tiff clicl ·not ;ire Pl-! 0 V 1 s .vo·J.clo :10 · is OI1ti tlod to cl¢,u6.c,'Os for loss of t:.20 uso of >is vo::,iclo. Ap0-rt fJ:>op uontioning t'.:::.::.t l10- !'.c,::i' projects_ i_n Irir1Gc.., rI,:w.coto ::me Tunclur.m \ . . . : i •• ,. ~ ' P -r I " · 1 , t ··· , - 1 .., -, ; ,, ·; ;., n- '·· ,, ,_;, ·"" · t ' --· ~ ,, . -, · t .., t t', 1 q C,lC .10 ,,Cc...UC0 c.,llj OV •. c0.1vO ~~1 W:.--:-- --· '{l.pl OC \1 ..• ,.0 .• i).l.OJOC c., .O ue,to:cic.l ti:.100 In t:10 2,~~sonc0 of suci cvid.onco t!:o :Jl::,,i:oitiff is tl;.01ofo:;:o . ' - . ontitloc~ tc t::0 rc:.tos usu.1.lly cli.::-,:r·coc.tlo in rnoy:::i. r,;u.-1ici:nlityo T'.1is · c..ccorclinc to tJ:::.o c,ffic':.::vit' is 7 7 000/= :::.ncl Di'T 0 I e,llc:e:,os it to 1o sovon (7) or .oic;!it (3) t~'.OtlS~,n;:7 s:dllf,1c;so I t2oroforo rule ti1.a.t t:o plo.intiff

• . ' is onti tlocl to n, ooo/ = l)OI' cl03" (LO,:.:,\ses for loss of t'.:.o l'.flO of is cr,r f:;:•o:.~ io/1/C9 to 17/3/090 T::,is :i.s· 89000/;; X 71 _chys = 536,000/=. I t1c1oforo ontor j_ucl:'..,'Oi::0:nt for t1c pkintiff for. s:1s0 536, 000/= wit:1 costs ::,ncl torost 0-t 121o' '· ··•· d) i0=-15\·s · .. · : _ f>-;t;;·-•.-·s, · - .. - 'l\7Tlfri1 ,.. ' ' - ' ·>, ' Lo .:.Jo J.,rc.L0lYJ!, /'" w f'f'r.1, ,. · .,i• · /":::' ~~\ · ~ " 922o I ;.·- '•, .· '\ \t ' . 1090 . . ' •'• ' .. ,,,., . 7 'FO:ivooc':. t~:is··9r1 (l,-;)of Ootohorf.!1:.!'.,Cl prosorico of 1:.1 •. Hwr:,k:ilo.,so, for t}:,1:: PR;,j,htiff c.nc".: · Dc,toyur~['// for t:.10 clofonc:o,nto \ ... ;, ·, ' ,; .. .- ; ./::· .. ; .. ,. 1'' . :,: , .. ; \ .-<·' . ' . ·/ '--?· ,(· ' rJ ,.,,-_j-:,:.1-"-<~__...p.... Lo Do }ICIIQT:]J} JUDG:m " I• . 9/10/1'.)90- .,. - LJ3H/JJH -. ? ., •i