Mon, 15 May 2017 12:54:58 +0000
By CHARLES MUSONDA
ZIMCO Limited (in liquidation) still owes its liquidators US$236,351.89 together with interest at commercial bank lending rates from November 1, 2016, the Lusaka High Court has been told.
According to the plaintiffs’ lawyer Arthur Ndhlovu of Messrs Mwenye & Mwitwa Advocates, the sums of US$537, 049.93 and K800, 000 owed by ZIMCO as at December 14, 2015 continued to accrue interest and the defendant was therefore liable to pay all sums.
“I verily believe that the defendant has not settled in full amounts outstanding and due to the first plaintiff as the sum of US$536,966.20 paid by the defendant only covers a portion of the total amount due from the defendant,” Mr. Ndhlovu said.
Last month bailiffs seized Findeco House, which is owned by ZIMCO, by virtue of the writ of possession dated April 7, 2017, and by judgment dated November 9, 2016 but the matter is still in court following a stay of execution granted to the defendant.
“We accordingly pray that this court should discharge the ex-parte stay of execution granted to the defendant (ZIMCO) and the defendant’s application should be dismissed with costs. We submit further that although granting of a stay of execution is entirely in the discretion of the court, such discretion will not be exercised without good cause,” Mr. Ndhlovu said.
He said this in the skeleton arguments in the matter between Chongo Coreem Musonda, Ireen Chiwala, A. M Wood & Company and ZIMCO Limited (in liquidation).
He said evidence on record established that following ZIMCO Limited’s failure to pay interest and costs to the plaintiffs, the parties executed a consent order on July 7, 2016 where a negotiated amount of interest and costs were agreed.
Mr. Ndhlovu said as agreed by the parties in the consent order, the plaintiffs were at liberty to claim the full amount of interest due if the negotiated sums of US$537,000.00 and K1, 000,000 were not paid before September 30, 2016.
He said ZIMCO did not pay on or before September 30, 2016 as agreed in the consent order and as at November 9, 2016, when the court delivered its judgment, there was no proof of payment tendered before the court.
“The plaintiffs were claiming the full amount of interest outstanding from the defendant and not the negotiated sum of US$537,000.00. Therefore, the defendant cannot claim to have paid all outstanding sums when it only paid the negotiated sum in the consent order…
“The defendant remains liable to pay the full amount of interest which remains outstanding in the sum of US$ 236,351.89 together with interest at commercial bank lending rates from 1st November 2016 until full and final payment,” Mr. Ndhlovu added.
