NIB Sues IKAM MD, 2 others

November 23, 2007 (Page 34)

Story: Mabel Aku Baneseh

THE National Investment Bank (NIB) has filed a motion for contempt against the Managing Director of IKAM Company Limited, a printing company, and two others at the Accra Fast Track High Court.
According to the bank, the Managing Director, Steven Marfo, and the two, Robert Yartey, solicitor of IKAM Company Limited, and Ken Asare, General Manager in charge of operations of IKAM Company Limited, flouted court orders and forcibly evicted guards and broke court seal on the company’s doors.
Following a court judgement in April 2006 which ordered IKAM Company Limited to pay a total of ¢37.8 billion being its indebtedness, plus interest and cost to NIB, the registrar of the court gave permission for the execution of writ of possession against IKAM Company Limited.
According to an affidavit in support of the motion for an order for committal of the respondents for contempt of court, court bailiffs on October 29, 2007 went to the company’s premises and caused the factory to be sealed.
Counsel for the NIB, Mr Frederick Asamoah, filed a motion on notice for injunction against the re-opening of the company’s premises and subsequently caused the factory to be sealed.
However, upon the alleged orders of Asare and the advice of Yartey, workers of the company operated.
According to Mr Asamoah, all the respondents knew or ought to have known that their conduct amounted to a blatant disobedience of the court orders and rules.
He said the respondents intentionally disobeyed court orders and for that matter they should be committed for contempt of court.
At the court’s sitting in Accra on Wednesday, it emerged that the respondents had not been served with the motion paper prompting the court to direct the plaintiff to make efforts to serve the respondents.
The court accordingly adjourned the matter to November 30, 2007 for hearing of the contempt case.
Meanwhile, respondents have filed a motion on notice for stay of execution of the judgement as well as an order restraining auctioneers from conducting the sale of the company’s assets.
In an affidavit in support of the motion paper, the Managing Director of IKAM Company Limited stated that the company had so far paid ¢10 billion to the NIB, thereby reducing its indebtedness to ¢27.8 billion.
He said the value of his company’s assets currently stood at more than ¢150 billion.
According to the applicant, the movable assets of the company stood at more than ¢120 billion, while the immovable assets were valued at more than ¢30 billion.
The applicant said to execute the judgement, the plaintiff, through its agents, had lumped together and attached all the assets of IKAM Company Limited far in excess of the judgement debt, interest and the cost awarded.
The applicant further averred that if the sale was conducted and the balance was given to him, it would have served no useful purpose as his business would then have collapsed.
In reply to the application, NIB stated that the filing of the motion was a ploy by the applicant to frustrate the bank from enjoying the fruit of the judgement.
Counsel for the bank held that ever since the judgement was passed last year, the applicant had filed many unmeritorious motions at the Court of Appeal only to abandon them, adding that nevertheless, the applicant had succeeded in delaying the plaintiff in the process of execution.
According to the NIB, IKAM Company Limited was insolvent and could not even raise money to pay its proposed instalment, among others.
The bank, therefore, challenged Marfo to sell any part of the company’s equipment to defray the company’s debts if he was capable of doing so.