[1988]DLHC249 • October 21, 1988 • High Court
ADDY vs. IRANI
The plaintiff claimed recovery of ¢2 million and US$3 million, or alternatively ¢465 million, as money had and received by the defendant but not refunded. He alleged that while employed for about seventeen years in Irani Brothers and Others, he sold flour allocated to him by the defendant above controlled prices, shared the illicit profits equally with the defendant, and accumulated ¢465 million between 1981 and June 1984. He further alleged that, on the defendant’s advice, the money was converted on the black market into US$3 million, with ¢2 million left over, and both sums were handed to the defendant for transfer and safekeeping abroad. The defendant denied that the plaintiff possessed such sums, denied receiving any money, and contended that in any event the money was tainted by illegality and therefore irrecoverable. Portion of judgment: opening paragraphs beginning “This is an action by the plaintiff for two sums...” through the defendant’s response that “the plaintiff did not and could not have owned or possessed the amounts...”
read moreJUDGMENT OF BROBBEY J. This is an action by the plaintiff for two sums being ¢2 million and US$3 million. In the alternative he claims ¢465 million. The action is grounded on simple contract for money had and received but not returned or refunded. The plaintiff’s case is that he worked for about seventeen years, commencing from about 1969 to June 1986, in a company called Irani Brothers and Others. In that company, the plaintiff worked variously as a canvasser, sales manager and factory manager. The defendant is an executive chairman of that company. The plaintiff averred that even before he started working for the company he had known the defendant personally. While working for the company, he and the defendant developed quite an intimate and well-nigh confidential relationship. Consequent upon this special relationship, the defendant made liberal allocations of flour to the plaintiff to sell. It is part of the case of the plaintiff that the defendant personally directed ...