4 days ago
9
The Akwa Ibom State Government has been dragged to court in a N31 billion suit over alleged forceful takeover and encroachment of land belonging to Serob Legends Resort Limited.
Pending at Court eight (8) of the State High Court, Uyo, and presided over by Hon. Justice Eme Eking, the matter started in May 2024 when Mrs Nsidem Etuk, who laid claim to the ownership of the massive piece of land which is situated at the demarcated portion of NITEL Property at Dominik Utuk Avenue, formerly known as Brooks Street, Uyo, raised the alarm of alleged takeover of the property by the Akwa Ibom State Government.
Even with a pending lawsuit and originating summons filed against the state government which was served to all parties, as obtained by DAILY INDEPENDENT, it was gathered that the state government had, on February 1, 2025, performed the ground breaking for the construction of a Security Command and Control Centre at the said portion of land.
While performing the groundbreaking ceremony on the disputed land, Governor Umo Eno said the property would equally accommodate three other projects, including the Akwa Ibom Broadcasting Corporation (AKBC) House; the headquarters of the Akwa Ibom Investment Corporation (AKICORP), and the Akwa Ibom Geographical Information System (AkwaGIS) head office.
The announcement came as the state government, it was gathered, failed to pay heed to the pleas by Mrs Etuk that the land belonged to her, as the announcement by the governor meant that the property now fully belonged to the state government.
The originating summons was prepared by counsel to the claimants, Adeboro Adamson SAN and Others, dated June 24, 2024, and it accordingly attracted replies from defendants.
The matter with Suit No: HU/243/2024 has Viro-Tech Projects Limited and Serob Legends Resort Limited as claimants, while the Governor of Akwa Ibom State, Akwa Ibom State Government, Ministry of Lands and Water Resources and Attorney General of Akwa Ibom State are 1st to 4th Defendants respectively.
With a 52-paragraph Statement of Claim, 59-paragraph Witness Statement on Oath, and 17 list of documents attached, the matter seeks: “A Declaration that the Claimants are the rightful owners of All that property measuring approximately 1.805 Hectares (18,504.00 sqm) situates at the Demarcated Portion of NITEL PROPERTY as contained in the Survey Plans being along Dominic Utuk Avenue, formerly known as Brooks Street, Uyo, Uyo Local Government, Akwa Ibom State, partly comprised in the Certificate of Occupancy No. 2/2/71 dated 2nd July, 2001, granted by the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.”
It is also asking the court to declare them as valid, legal and subsisting owners of the property, the claimants seek a declaration that the defendants do not have any legal capacity, authority, or power, to forcibly enter, demolish, destroy, develop or takeover the claimants’ parcel of land.
The claimants is also asking for a declaration that the “defendants’ acts of forcibly entering, violently destroying, callously demolishing and warful takeover of the claimants’ parcel of land is unlawful, illegal, and untra vires to Section 49(1) & (2) and 50(2) of the Land Use Acts, (1978) and all other applicable laws.”
While praying the court to declare the defendants action as unlawful, which amounts to trespass, the claimants asked for an Order of perpetual injunction restraining the defendants from committing any further act of trespass whatsoever, and pay the sum of One Billion Naira (#1,000,000,000) only as exemplary damages.
They also urged the court to award the sum of Thirty Billion One Hundred and Twenty Million and Fifty Thousand Naira (#30,120,050,000) as specific damages against the defendants in favour of the 2nd claimant for willful destruction and violent demolition of structures in the property.
When the matter came up for hearing last. Tuesday at the State High Court 8, the presiding judge, Honourable Justice Eme Ekong, adjourned the case to April 29, 2025 for ruling on the motion for interlocutory injunction. However, it was not without counsels to both parties arguing their cases.
Leading the argument for the claimants, Adeboro Adamson SAN, reeled out list of documents filed on the matter.
He told the judge that they were satisfied with all written addresses and exhibits and would accordingly rely on them for the arguments.
On his part, the Head of Civil Litigation in the Akwa Ibom State Ministry of Justice, Anietie Inyang Esq, told the court that their counter affidavit tendered on August 7, 2024, was followed by the second counter affidavit filed on 15th August, 2024.
Defendants’ counsel applied to withdraw the counter affidavit filed on August 7th, pleading that they shall henceforth rely on the counter affidavit of August 15.
The Court, accordingly struck out the counter affidavit of 7th August, 2024 and retained that of August 15, 2024.
Defendants maintained that their counter affidavit in many paragraphs, backed by 5 exhibits are wholly adopted as their arguments.
Upon withdrawal of the counter affidavit of August 7 by the defendants’ counsel, the claimants’ counsel raised an order, paralysing the defendants’ counter affidavit of 15 August, saying it was not being regularized with an appropriate motion.
Claimants observed that the law specifically restricts such regularisation within 7 days, which was not followed by the Defendants. He stressed that the law was not meant to be abandoned, but to be followed to the later.
Adamson maintained that in as much as counsel did not follow laid down procedures in filing counter affidavit against the subsisting motion, it implied that the motion was standing unopposed.
He therefore pleaded with the court, not to spare the negligence of the defendants counsel, but to go ahead and grant the injunction order.
Counsel to defendants pleaded with the court not to grant the pleas of the claimants counsel, saying that their filing was still within the grace period of the extended time.
Adamson also urged parties involved to maintain the status quo pending the determination of the court. He made this call when told by journalists that some persons have been working on the disputed land despite the matter being before a court of competent jurisdiction.
According to Adamson, once parties submit to the jurisdiction of the court, it is their duty to ensure that they do not prejudice the matter before the court.
He said, “We had earlier applied for interlocutory injunction for parties to maintain status quo ante in the matter. In order words, we were calling for parties to maintain the peace, pending the determination of the court.
“Even though we’ve heard that some persons are working on the land as we speak, our concern is that the matter is before a court of competent jurisdiction.
“Truth is that, once anyone submits to the jurisdiction of the court, it is your duty and obligation to ensure that you don’t do anything that will prejudice the matter before the court of law. It is a straightforward matter.”
Adamson emphasised the importance of maintaining the sanctity of the judiciary, stating that doing anything before the determination of the matter is a violation of the judiciary’s sanctity.
He expressed disappointment that some parties are behaving in a manner that suggests disregard for the court’s authority.
Adamson urged the lawyers involved in the matter to advise their clients to maintain the peace, stressing that the court’s ruling should be awaited to determine the outcome of the dispute.
“All the parties have filed their processes. To this extent, nobody should have gone to that property. It is to cement this that we have approached the court for an interlocutory order, so that if the court gives an express order and they go ahead to disobey the order, that would be contempt of court. Strictly speaking, let the court rule on the matter so that we know where it goes.
“In a civilised society, once you have a lawyer representing you in court, it means you have given him consent to represent you. That lawyer should be able to tell you the truth, that once a matter is in Court, you don’t do anything that would prejudice it.
“It is unfortunate that some people are behaving that way. I expect the lawyers to be able to advise their clients to maintain the peace. Doing anything before the determination of the matter before the Court is a violation of the sanctity of the judiciary.”
However, when contacted, former commissioners in both the Ministry of Justice and the Ministry of Lands & Town Planning — Uko Essien-Udom SAN Captain Iniobong Ekon respectively denied knowledge of the suit.
While Essien-Udom was unreached, Captain Iniobong Ekong said he was not aware of the law Suit.
How Serob Legends Resort Limited Acquired The Land
It all started in 2007 during the privatisation era of the Obasanjo/Abubakar administration, even as Otunba Olusola Adekanola was a reputable property firm that served as Federal Government’s Liquidator
NITEL was one of the Federal Government’s properties, sold out to a private individual in 2007.
Extracts of the “Deed of Conveyance” between NITEL TRUSTEES LTD (In Liquidation) through its Liquidator, Otunba Olusola Adekanola and SEROB LEGENDS RESORT LTD, reads thus in parts:
“The NITEL TRUSTEES LTD was in March 2005 incorporated under the Companies and Allied Matters Act (Cap 59) LFN 1990 with CAC RC No. 618331 as a legal entity for the management of NITEL Staff Pension Fund (The Fund), which was created for the benefit of NITEL Staff in order to cater for the pensions and gratuities of the employees.
“The Nigerian Telecommunications Plc, the parent company of the Fund, being a Government owned company and based on the privatisation policy of the Federal Government, acting through the Bureau of Public Enterprises (BPE), was to settle all outstanding staff benefits since it became necessary not to continue with the operation of the Fund.
“Sequel to the paragraph ‘2’ of the recital above, Trustees of the Fund held an Extraordinary General Meeting of the Board of Trustees wherein a special resolution was passed on the 8th Day of February, 2007 to wit, winding up the NITEL TRUSTEES LTD which hitherto operates the NITEL Staff Pension Fund at the Federal High Court, pursuant to the Companies and Allied Matters Act (CAP 59) LFN 1990.
“By an order of Hon. Justice Abimbola Ogie of the Federal High Court Abuja granted on the 28th of March, 2007 and by a letter dated 12th February, 2007 from the Bureau of Public Enterprises, Otunba Olusola Adekanola was appointed as the Liquidator for the assets held by NITEL TRUSTEES LTD.
“By virtue of a Deed of Conveyance between NITEL Plc and NITEL TRUSTEES LTD, the later (NITEL TRUSTEES LTD) became the owner of all the property as demarcate portion of NITEL property along Dominic Utuk Avenue (formerly Brooks Street) Uyo Local Government Area.
“Following the request for Expression of Interest/Submission of Bids published by the Liquidator in the National Newspaper, for the sale of the said property, and after receiving bids in respect of same, the Assignee became the preferred bidder in respect of the said property, which said sale to the Assignee, the Committee of Inspectors overseeing the liquidation process as approved at its Committee of Inspecton meeting at NPE Headquarters, Abuja, dated the 16th May, 2007.
“The Assignor is desirous of transferring its unexpired legal and equitable rights and interest in the property to the Assignee and the Assignee is willing to take the same subject to the terms and conditions contained herein:
“In consideration of the agreed sum paid by the Assignee to the Assignor (the receipt whereof the Assignor hereby acknowledge), and subject to obtaining requisite consent of the appropriate authority to this Deed, the Assignor hereby assigns all its rights, titles and interests in and to all that property situate as the Demarcated Portion of NITEL along Dominic Utuk Avenue (formerly Brooks Street),2 Uyo Local Government Area, Akwa Ibom State, Measuring 8,204.127 Square Metres and more particularly described in the schedule to this Deed to the Assignee free from encumbrances….”
An “Offer of a Leasehold Interest”, generated by Otunba Olusola Adekanola, dated March 15, 2016, addressed to SEROB LEGENDS RESORT LTD, stated that the Assignee had emerged preferred Bidder and was fortunately chosen to take over the ownership of the property.
The four-page document reads thus in parts: “I am pleased to inform you that you have emerged the preferred Bidder of the property on ‘as is’ basis at the stipulated price therein after referred to as ‘The Consideration’.
“Within 60 days from the receipt of this Letter of Offer, the Consideration shall reach the Liquidator. In addition to the payment of the Consideration, a sum equivalent to Five per cent (5%) of the Consideration which shall be the transaction cost referred to in Paragraph 3 above shall be paid.”
Again, a “Letter of Authority” by Otunba Olusola Adekanola addressed to SEROB LEGENDS RESORT LTD on March 15, 2016, acknowledged the full payment for the purchase of the property and thereafter conveyed full ownership to SEROB LEGENDS RESORT LTD.
The letter reads, “Pursuant to your ‘Letter of Acceptance’ of Offer of a Leasehold Interest in NITEL MTEL PENSION FUND in Liquidation, we hereby acknowledge the payment of the purchase price of the property known as NITEL Property located at Dominic Utuk Avenue (formerly Brooks Street), Uyo Local Government Area, Akwa Ibom State, Measuring 8,204.127 Square Metres.
“Furthermore, you are hereby informed that your payment of the payment price of the said property confers on you all and full legal rights as the bonafide owner of the said property.
“This letter authorises you to legally deal with the property and take full possession of same.”
English (US) ·