Disputed Debt: Court Discharges Exparte Orders On PDP Chieftain’s Firm, Aeroland Travels, Others

Disputed Debt: Court Discharges Exparte Orders On PDP Chieftain’s Firm, Aeroland Travels, Others

Justice Daniel Osiagor of a Lagos Federal High Court, today, discharged Exparte Orders made against Aeroland Travels and other properties belonging to its owner, Mr. Segun Adewale, a chieftain of the Peoples’ Democratic Party (PDP). 

Justice Osiagor had on February 7, 2022, granted the Exparte Orders filed by the Asset Management Corporation Of Nigeria (AMCON) against the firm of the PDP Chieftain. 

The order empowered AMCON to sealed the firm and other properties belonging to the Peoples’ Democratic Party (PDP) Chieftain, Segun Adewale. 

The properties sealed by AMCON in a suit numbered FHC/L/CS/AMC/154/2021, includes; Plot 4 & 4B Block 66 Magodo Scheme, Lagos State; Plot 9, Block 44c, Adetoro Adelaja Street, Magodo Lagos; No. 4C Maye Ogundana Street, Magodo Lagos; No. 10, Oluyomi Oshinkoya Street, Magodo Residential Scheme, Lagos; Plot 8, Block 66, Residential Scheme, Sangisha, Lagos; No. 2A, John Olugbo Street, Ikeja, Lagos; No. 2 Fadeyi Street, off Awolowo way, Ikeja, Lagos; No. 8 Surulere Alelor Street, Millenium, Gbagada; and No. 14 Jerry Iriabe Street, off Bashorun Okunsanya, off Admiralty Road, Lekki Penisula.”

However, Adewale in a motion pursuant to sections 6 an 36 of the constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended), sections 49(3) and 50(2)  of AMCON Act, 2020 (As amended) Order 26 Rules 9(1) of the Federal High Court (Civil Procedure) Rulees 2019, Order 12 Rule 3 of the AMCON, asked the court for an order discharging and/or vacating the Exparte Orders made on the 7th day of February 2022, but which was served on him on the 6th day of May 2022. 

He also asked for an order directing the AMCON to indemnify him for damages suffered as a result of the Exparte Orders made on the 7th day of February 2022.

He told the court that AMCON materially misrepresented to, and concealed material facts from this Honourable Court and also engaged in deliberate suppression of facts.

He also stated that the court lacks the jurisdiction to entertain the matter or make the ex-parte orders in issue, as the underlying matter amounts to a gross abuse of court process.

Justice Osiagor after hearing Adewale’s counsel, Tope Alabi, who asked the court to grant his clients application, and AMCON’s counsel, Chief Aloy Ezenduka, and citing plethoras of authorites, acceded to the Adewale’s request and discharged his February 7, 2022, Exparte order made against Aeroland Travels.

Justice Osiagor, in particular, ordered the unseal of all properties affected by February 7, 2022, Exparte order.

The judge thereafter transferred AMCON’s case file to Justice Tijjani Ringim, who is currently presiding over the suit filed against it and Polaris Bank by the Aeroland Travels Limited.

Adewale in an affidavit stated that AMCON obtained the orders by fraud, non-disclosure, utter misresentation, and concealment of material facts a plicable to the matter. 

He also stated that as a fact that as at the 26th day of November, 2021 when the AMCON filed the exparte motion used in obtaining the exparte orders now sought to be discharged and/or vacated, there is already a pending suit before the Court – Suit No. FHC/L/CS/2093/2018 between Aeroland Travels Nigeria Limited v Polaris Bank Limited another. filed on the 12th day of December, 2018, and that in the said suit, AMCON is, amongst other things: 1. challenging the authority of the Plaintiff/Respondent to appoint a Receiver/Manager over the assets and business of the first Defendant over a purported indebtedness that was mischievously created through and dubious transactions; “a declaration that the first defendant is not indebted to the plaintiff or liable to payment of any sum whatsoever to the Plaintiff.

“An order restraining the Plaintiff from appointing a Receiver/Manager over the assets and business of the first Defendant; and an order compelling Polaris Bank Ltd. (whom the Plaintiff herein purportedly purchased the Eligible Bank Asset from) to refund the illegally debited sums taken from the first Defendant’s account over a period of time.

“A perpetual injunction restraining the Plaintiff from tampering with or transferring ownership or possessory rights or creating third party interest over the first Defendant’s properties. Now attached and marked as Exhibit ATL 1 is a copy of the Writ of Summons and statement of claims in suit numbered FHC/L/CS/2093/2018.”

He also stated that as a fact that in the said Suit No. FHC/L/CS/2093/2018 which is currently pending before Honourable Justice G. Ringim, the AMCON, who was sued as second Defendant, has not filed any Defence till date but instead filed a Notice of Preliminary Objection. And that the first defendant, Polaris Bank has already filed its Counter Affidavit to the said Notice of Preliminary Objection which the Plaintiff has equally filed its Reply on Point of Law and same has been fixed for hearing. 

“He stated that despite the fact the he got a deserving judgment, after AMCON had successfully ruined my company, my reputation and embarrassed and crucified me in the pages of newspaper, without even asking me. And despite that my N1.8 billion was stolen by Skye bank to Polaris, am still willing and available to meet with AMCON to check the debt that Polaris dubiously stolen from Account. Am still available for reconcilation and that what he can own any one is love not money.”

He further stated that the subject matter of Suit No. FHC/L/CS/2093/2018 is the purported indebtedness of Polaris Bank  in the sum of N1,822,069,840.42 billion,, which the bank is keenly contesting via that suit and indeed claiming that it is in fact Polaris Bank (whom the Plaintiff herein purportedly purchased the Eligible Bank Asset from) that has overcharged the 1st Defendant’s account and therefore entitled to a refund of the overcharges. And that the said suit No. FHC/L/CS/2093/2018 is yet to be determined by this Honourable Court and the that fact and deliberately misled this court into granting the Exparte orders now sought to be discharged/vacated.