Landlord Accuses AMCON of Flouting Court Order
A property owner, Mr Adebayo Shittu has accused the Asset Management Corporation of Nigeria (AMCON) of violating an order of the Court of Appeal, Lagos that restrained it from taking any action on his building.
Shittu said the AMCON’s action on July 28 was not only contemptuous, but also a flagrant abuse of the judgement of the Court of Appeal delivered on December 15, 2020, in Lagos.
He made this allegation in a statement he issued at the weekend following the demolition of his two buildings in Victory Park Estate, Ibeju-Lekki, Victoria Island last Wednesday.
Specifically, Shittu claimed that the judgement barred the corporation from taking any action on the said properties in Victory Park Estate, in Ibeju-Lekki, Victoria Island.
According to him, the decision of AMCON to demolish the buildings violated a subsisting order of the appellate court. The court delivered its decision on December 15, 2020.
Sequel to an appeal challenging the ruling of a Lagos High Court, the appellate court had granted an Order of Interlocutory Injunction in favour of the first and second respondents, Mr Adebayo Mumuni Shittu and More & S.A. More Limited.
In its decision, the court declared: “By a Writ of summons and Statement of Claim dated September 6, 2019 and filed during the lower court’s 2019 annual vacation, Shittu and More & S.A. More Limited instituted an action against Knight Rook Limited and Mr Lanre Olaoluwa, respectively 3rd and 4th respondents.
“That the 1st and 2nd respondents also sought an order of interlocutory injunction against the defendants at the lower court. The appellant being the party with the sole interest in the subject matter of the suit applied to be joined in the suit. The appellant was joined by the lower court on September 17, 2019.
“The cause of action by the respondents before the trial court, as can be garnered from record, is on the transaction between the 1st and 2nd respondents and the 3rd and 4th respondents which principally centres on sale of land on which the purported residence of the 1st and 2nd respondents stands.
“It is on record that the respondent was said to have been allegedly locked out of his residence.”
The court stated that it was on the strength of this that the learned trial judge exercised his judicial discretion restraining the 3rd and 4th respondents from any form of further restriction of the 1st and 2nd respondents from his said house pending the determination of the substantive suit.
It stated that a judicial discretion “is said to be a science of understanding to discern between falsity and truth, between a shadow and substance, between equity and colourable glosses and preference, and not to do their wills and private affection.
“Wherefore, judicial discretion has been exercised bona fide as in the appeal at hand uninfluenced by irrelevant considerations and not arbitrary or illegally by the lower court, the general rule is that an Appeal Court will not ordinarily interfere,” the court said.
A visit to the Victory Park Estate this morning showed that bulldozers were at work, demolishing the buildings on the directive of AMCON.