Jul 24, 2012, 2:12 PM
The Kanifing Magistrates' Court on Friday entered judgment in favour of one Kutubo Jakah Touray against Carnegie Minerals.
The trial magistrate ordered the defendant, Carnegie Minerals, to pay the plaintiff $11,000 being arrears of outstanding rent from 15 December 2009.
Carnegie Minerals was also ordered to deliver to the plaintiff possession of the property, which is presently locked, within 14 days from the date of this judgment.
A rate of 15 per cent interest per annum was awarded to the plaintiff against the defendant.
The trial magistrate allowed profits at the rate of $458 per month from 15 December 2008, to be paid to the plaintiff. A cost charge of D10,000 was also awarded to the plaintiff.
In his judgment, Magistrate Abeke stated that the plaintiff, Kutubo Jakah Touray, was claiming from the defendant, Carnegie Minerals, US$5,500, being rent arrears from 15 December 2009; possession interest at the rate of 15 per cent per annum, and profits at the rate of US$458 per month from 15 December 2009; as well as cost charges.
Magistrate Abeke indicated that the action was initiated on 13 May 2010, adding that since then, service could not be effected on the defendant.
As such, he went on, a substitutional service was effected on 9 June 2010 by pasting.
"The said service is evidenced by the affidavit of service sworn to by one Essaiki Jobe, the process server of the court," he said.
He also said that by one excuse or the other, the matter had suffered several adjournments.
He further indicated that on 20 October 2010, the matter was called and the plaintiff’s representative, Mr D. Neyestain, was present in court but neither the defendant nor its representative appeared in court.
The magistrate stated that Miss Anna Njie, counsel for the plaintiff, was in court and informed the court that the defendant had been duly served enough substitutional service, and referred the court to the affidavit of 9 June 2010 in the court file.
"The plaintiff's counsel therefore moved the court pursuance to section 7(1) of the subordinate Court Civil Proceedings Act," he said in his judgment.
He added that the court allowed the plaintiff’s counsel to proceed with the case.
Magistrate Abeke said that the plaintiff’s representative, Mr Neyestain, guided by their counsel, proceeded and stated the facts of their case and tendered several exhibits.
The trial magistrate further stated that during hearing, the plaintiff’s counsel, Miss A. Njie, made an application to amend the praecipe in its paragraph one of the claim that the sum of $5,500 be substituted with the amount of $11,000 and the date 15 December 2008.
He further posited that the application was granted and the said paragraph amended as requested.
After the presentation of the facts of the case, the plaintiff's counsel urged the court to view the conduct of the defendant and enter judgment in their favour as per the plaintiff’s claim, the magistrate indicated.
He therefore told the court: "I have carefully studied the entire claim of the plaintiff, the facts and exhibits in support of the claim, and I have no reservation to believe the claim of the plaintiff, especially when noting the conduct of the defendant in this regard. I rely on the statutory provision of Section 7(1) of the subordinate Court Civil Proceedings Act to enter judgment in favour of the plaintiff."