The party shows that the cheques were drawn on December 7, 2015 while an order of court directing that rentals should be paid at the Mei & Mei Trust Account was made on December 18, 2015. The party did not collect the rentals as they were deposited into a trust account. Therefore, there was no obligation on the part of Abdulla to pay. Moreover, Abdulla said the party has based its claim on the cheques that were drawn two years prior to cashing them.

He said it is a trite principle that cheques must be cashed within a period of 90 days or else they become obsolete and invalid. He further said the party sought to cash the cheques only two years later, resulting in them being dishonoured. He said the cheques the BCP bases its claim on are therefore invalid and have been rightly dishonoured. Consequently, he said the party cannot seek to abuse the court process by seeking a speedy relief while it had waited two years before cashing the cheques.

In its answering affidavit, the party submitted that the cheques were evidence of a clear written acknowledgement of Abdulla’s indebtedness to the party. It also showed that Abdulla has not denied his signature on the cheques, therefore is liable to pay as evidenced by his signature. The party denied the submission that because the cheques were drawn in 2015, they were therefore invalid and rightly dishonoured. The party contends that the cheques in question would not be merely discharged by failure to present them within three months. It therefore said the cheques were dishonoured by non-payment and not by reason of invalidity.

When the matter continued in court last week Thursday,  neither Abdulla nor his legal representative were present. Advocate Thulo Mahlakeng representing the BCP highlighted both Abdulla and his lawyer’s absence to the court. He therefore requested the court to grant a provisional sentence as the matter had been dragging for the last two years.