There was a new twist to the suit brought against the National Hajj Committee (NHC) yesterday as 10 individuals claimed ownership of the accounts of the NHC, contrary to evidence adduced by an official of the Intercontinental Bank Ghana (IBG).When proceedings began at the Fast Track High Court, counsel for the claimants, who are mostly members' of the current Hajj Committee, applied to withdraw a notice filed on October 29, 2010, which had described the NHC as the owner of the accounts and replace it with a new document.Ms Barbara Serwaa Asamoah's notice was filed barely 24 hours after the court had dismissed an application from the NHC that prayed it to set aside an order freezing the accounts of the committee.The application followed the Hajj Committee's indebtedness of GH¢214,000 to a former member of the Committee.The new notice mentioned the new claimants to the two accounts, which contain GH¢1,752,948.48 and $238,028.80, as Inusah Fuseini, Amadu Sorogho, Babalamie Abu Sadat, Alhassan Benneh, Sheikh Yahaya Amin, Alhaji Yusuf Captain, Alhaji Mahama Fuseini, Hajia Laadi Ayi Ayamba, Hajia Afusat Iyabor and Hajj Mohammed Addo.The numbers for the cedi and dollar accounts are 1051 870 0907 and 1052 5200 8336, respectively.However, the Head of Personal and Enterprises Banking at the IBG, Albert Papa Kofi Ackun, mounted the witness box and informed the court on oath that records at the bank indicated that the NHC was the owner of the account being claimed by the 10 individuals.Mr Ackun, who appeared on behalf of the bank upon a court order, said the cedi and dollar accounts, which fell under enterprises and not personal accounts, had Alhaji Alhassan Benneh, the current chairman of the NHC, and Hajj Ahmed Iddris as signatories.The witness tendered bank documents in evidence as exhibits to authenticate his evidence.The presiding judge, Mr Justice S. K. Asiedu, refused the application for withdrawal and rather directed Ms Asamoah to add the new notice to the records to enable the court to arrive at the truth.Before the court's ruling, counsel for the plaintiff, Mr Yonny Kulendi, had objected to the withdrawal of the October 29, 2010 notice on the grounds that it was procedurally wrong and he, therefore, prayed the court to allow both notices to stand in the court's record books to enable the court to examine the conduct of what he described as "so-called claimants of the accounts".Mr Kulendi said a group of people were using all names and aliases to avoid a legitimate debt and for that reason the court should not allow itself to be disabled and abused.Counsel was displeased with persons creating the impression in the media that the court was sabotaging the Hajj pilgrimage when, according to him, that was far from the truth.He advised persons who had resorted to media trial to check the facts before passing judgement.The trial judge should have ruled on whether or not to order the bank to pay the plaintiff but decided to hold on with his ruling to enable parties in the case to respond to the application describing the 10 individuals as claimants to the account.Mr Justice Asiedu said it was important for the court to allow the court processes to be completed in order to arrive at the bottom of the matter to unveil the truth, which he said was only one.The trial judge, therefore, directed Mr Kulendi to file his response to the latest claim to enable the registrar to serve the other parties in the case. A new date will be fixed by the registrar after parties in the case have filed their responses.In the substantive matter, the plaintiff, Afaa Akeem, loaned the money to the committee, which was paid directly to Egypt Air on November 22, 2008 in order to avoid the cancellation of the flight which had been chartered to carry pilgrims to Saudi Arabia but the committee failed to. pay back the money.After persistent calls on the committee to pay back his money had failed, he issued a writ at the Fast Track High Court on November 11, 2009 and got default judgement in his favour on January 28, 2010 after the committee had failed to file its defence.Following the court's judgement in favour of the plaintiff and further issuance of a garnishee order, which was directed at the bankers of the Hajj Committee, an affidavit was filed by the committee praying the court to set aside the plaintiff's application for a garnishee order on the grounds that the current committee did not have anything to do with the 2008 IHMC committee.However, counsel for the plaintiff, Mr Kulendi, advanced arguments to prove that the current committee had taken over the offices of the IHMC, as well as its assets and had even gone on to pay some debts owed by the 2008 IHMC.Dismissing the application, the court held that the application filed by the committee was without merit and was frivolous and incompetent and awarded costs of GH¢1,000 against Awudu Ariff Abubakar, who swore the affidavit praying the court to set aside its garnishee order.Source: Daily Graphic