News / National
Grace Mugabe 'diamond ring dealer' in trouble
12 May 2017 at 05:55hrs | Views
Lebanese national Jamal Joseph Hamed, who is embroiled in a $1,4 million diamond ring row with First Lady Grace Mugabe, has been dragged to court by local businessman Ahmed Abass Ahmed over $1,475 million allegedly advanced to him as a personal loan nearly 10 years ago.
Ahmed issued the summons against Hamed on May 5 this year, but the Lebanese is yet to respond to the lawsuit.
According to Ahmed, the lawsuit emanated from the duo's loan agreement entered between the parties on December 10, 2008.
Ahmed said on the date and month in question, he advanced Hamed a loan amounting to $1 475 000 and in terms of the agreement, Hamed was supposed to have repaid the whole amount on or before February 28, 2009.
"The defendant (Hamed) duly signed an acknowledgement of debt confirming indebtedness to plaintiff (Ahmed) and arranged for a payment plan, which plaintiff never fulfilled," Ahmed said.
"Sometime in May 2016, defendant had made an attempt to pay $302 000, but unilaterally terminated the transfer of the money and defendant remains in breach thereof."
The local businessman further said in breach of the terms and conditions of the agreement, Hamed, despite demand on diverse occasions, had refused, neglected and/or failed to fulfil his contractual agreement, prompting the former to seek the intervention of the court to recover his money.
"Wherefore plaintiff's claim against the defendant is for payment in the sum of $1 475 000, interest on the sum of $1 475 000 calculated at the prescribed rate and costs of suit on a legal practitioner and client scale," he said.
Ahmed issued the summons against Hamed on May 5 this year, but the Lebanese is yet to respond to the lawsuit.
According to Ahmed, the lawsuit emanated from the duo's loan agreement entered between the parties on December 10, 2008.
Ahmed said on the date and month in question, he advanced Hamed a loan amounting to $1 475 000 and in terms of the agreement, Hamed was supposed to have repaid the whole amount on or before February 28, 2009.
"Sometime in May 2016, defendant had made an attempt to pay $302 000, but unilaterally terminated the transfer of the money and defendant remains in breach thereof."
The local businessman further said in breach of the terms and conditions of the agreement, Hamed, despite demand on diverse occasions, had refused, neglected and/or failed to fulfil his contractual agreement, prompting the former to seek the intervention of the court to recover his money.
"Wherefore plaintiff's claim against the defendant is for payment in the sum of $1 475 000, interest on the sum of $1 475 000 calculated at the prescribed rate and costs of suit on a legal practitioner and client scale," he said.
Source - newsday
