N3.1bn, $835,000 Debts: Court Freezes Plural Oil’s Accounts as EFCC Probes Alleged Diversion

Wale Igbintade

Justice Akintayo Aluko of the Federal High Court in Lagos has issued an interim order freezing the bank accounts of Plural Oil Marketing Limited and two of its directors over an alleged indebtedness of N3.17 billion and $835,486.76 owed to Providus Bank Limited.

The order, delivered on October 7, 2025, followed an ex parte application filed by Providus Bank through its counsel, Mr. Mitchel Aribisala. 

The bank sought to restrain the defendants and several financial institutions from tampering with any funds linked to the oil marketing company pending the determination of a substantive motion.

The defendants in the suit, marked FHC/L/CS/2015/2025, are Plural Oil Marketing Limited, Mr. Babatunde Olukunle Oyefolu, and Ms. Oluwatobiloba Ayomide Oyefolu.

Under the interim order, Justice Aluko directed 30 commercial and merchant banks in Nigeria to immediately freeze all accounts belonging to or associated with the defendants up to the value of N3,169,133,292.27 and $835,486.76.

The judge also instructed the banks to place a lien or post-no-debit (PND) restriction on any account operated by the defendants, directly or indirectly, pending the hearing of the bank’s motion on notice. 

Additionally, the court directed several digital payment platforms and settlement systems, including NIBSS, Interswitch, Opay, MoMo PSB, Unified Payments, Hydrogen Payment Services Company, and Hope PSB, not to honour any debit instruction on the accounts until further orders.

Justice Aluko further ordered the respondent banks to file an affidavit of return within seven days of service, detailing all accounts linked to the defendants’ BVNs, the balances in each account, and the transactional history for the past six months.

The judge also granted leave to Providus Bank to serve court processes on the 2nd and 3rd defendants Babatunde and Oluwatobiloba Oyefolu by substituted means through pasting at their last known address at No. 8A, Lalupon Close, Ikoyi, Lagos.

However, the court refused a similar request for the 1st defendant, Plural Oil, noting that a corporate body cannot be served that way.

Justice Aluko held that the freezing order would remain in force until the hearing and determination of the motion on notice and directed Providus Bank to file an undertaking as to damages in the event the order was wrongly granted. 

In its supporting affidavit, deposed to by Ms. Arith Esin, a Recovery and Remedial Officer, Providus Bank alleged the defendants owed N3.17 billion and $835,486.76 as of September 24, 2025.

The bank said the debt arose from credit facilities granted to Plural Oil for the importation of Base Oil, a raw material for lubricant blending which the company allegedly failed to repay despite repeated demands. 

The relationship began in 2018 when Plural Oil opened a current account with the bank. 

Facilities were issued through confirmed Letters of Credit and overdraft lines, which were later restructured as time loans between 2021 and 2023 due to persistent default.

Providus Bank alleged that Plural Oil sold the financed Base Oil, pledged as collateral without remitting proceeds, prompting the bank to petition the EFCC in January 2024 after discovering the products at Nosak Tank Farm had been secretly removed and sold contrary to loan terms.

The bank also tendered personal guarantees executed by Babatunde and Oluwatobiloba Oyefolu, who pledged to be personally liable for the company’s debts.

Meanwhile, Plural Oil Marketing Limited and its director, Mr. Babatunde Olukunle Oyefolu, have filed an application before the Federal High Court seeking to set aside the ex parte freezing order.

In a motion on notice filed by their counsel, Dr. Sulaiman Usman (SAN), the applicants described the order as oppressive, unconstitutional, and obtained in breach of their fundamental rights. 

They argued it was issued without service of originating processes and without credible evidence linking the listed BVNs to the alleged indebtedness.

In a 27-paragraph affidavit deposed to by Mr. Oluwatobiloba Ayomide Oyefolu, a director of the company, Plural Oil said its operations were abruptly disrupted on October 9, 2025, when several accounts belonging to the company and its officers were frozen.

Oyefolu stated that the company only became aware of the order when it received a letter from AOS Practice, counsel to Providus Bank, directing commercial banks to freeze all accounts linked to the specified BVNs.

He argued that the order was issued before the originating processes were served, noting that the enrolled order itself granted leave for substituted service, confirming that no valid service had been effected at the time.

He also described the freezing directive as a “blanket order” extending to unrelated accounts of third parties who are not parties to the suit.

According to him, the order amounted to judicial overreach and violated Sections 36 and 44 of the 1999 Constitution (as amended), guaranteeing the right to fair hearing and protection from unlawful deprivation of property.

Plural Oil and its directors further argued that Providus Bank presented no prima facie evidence showing an imminent risk of asset dissipation or linking the frozen funds to them.

Oyefolu added that Providus Bank had attempted to criminalise a civil banking dispute by petitioning the EFCC, which detained him for seven days under what he described as dehumanising conditions, an act he termed a gross abuse of process.