Fortune Investments (Private) Limited filed the summons after the church reportedly refused to pay the amount.
“On or about August 15, 2015, the plaintiff (Fortune Investments) supplied 30 000 T-shirts giving a total of $135 000. The defendant (AFM) made payments towards extinguishing the debt, leaving a balance of $45 000.
“Since July 2016, the defendants have been making promises of settling but to no avail.
“As a result, the plaintiff has been forced to take action to recover the money that is due, owing and outstanding and by agreement between them and their legal practitioners, have become liable to pay both legal costs and collection commission,” reads part of the summons.
The company said despite follow up through a letter of demand dated July 7, 2016, the church has “failed, rejected or refused to pay the amount in respect of the debt”.
However, in its response, the church — through one Munyaradzi Shumba — said AFM was actually given the T-shirts to sell on behalf of the company to its various provinces as opposed to having bought them from the firm.
“Further, the defendant undertook to collect, on behalf of the plaintiff, monies realised from the sales for onwards transmission to the plaintiff.
“The defendant duly executed its obligations by receiving the T-shirts, selling them and constantly remitting all monies it realised from the sales to the plaintiff,” he said.
Shumba further argued that the church is still in possession of unsold T-shirts received from Fortune Investments, in terms of the agreement.
“There was never an agreement of sale of T-shirts between the defendant and the plaintiff,” the court heard.
The church also made a counter-claim, demanding $30 000 commission from the printing company.
“That despite receiving the initial remittance, the defendant failed, neglected/or refused to pay the plaintiff its commission in terms of the parties’ agreement,” the church claimed.
The church went further to make an amendment to its plea, claiming that it did not receive the T-shirts from Fortune Investments but from Nelrona Trading (Private) Limited, through a verbal agreement.
“The defendant further avers that it made various payments to Nelrona Trading (Private) Limited as agreed by the defendant and the said Nelrona Trading (Private) Limited represented by (Mr) Banda.
“The amount outstanding for the T-shirts is payable to Nelrona Trading (Private) Limited upon the remainder of the T-shirts having been fully sold by its various provinces and the defendant having in turn collected the same.
“As it stands, however, the remainder of the T-shirts have not been sold and there haven’t been monies for the defendant to collect for onwards transmission to Nelrona Trading (Private) Limited.
“The defendant avers that, as mere collecting agent on behalf of the Nelrona Trading (Private) Limited, the plaintiff has no claim against the defendant,” the court heard.
The court is still to make a determination in the matter. Daily News