Kpokpogri: Court Lengthens Restraining Order Against FCT Minister, FCDA, Others

0
15

Justice Charles Agbaza of the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory, on Friday, extended a restraining order he issued against the FCT Minister, the Federal Capital Territory Administration, and the Federal Capital Development Authority, over the demolition of a house at plot 203 and 204, 27 Road, Guzape District, Abuja.

Other Defendants in the matter are the Abuja Metropolitan Management Council, the Federal Housing Authority and the Attorney General of the Federation.

The partly demolished house is owned by an Abuja-based businessman, Prince Joseph Kpokpogri.

Justice Agbaza made the restraining order on July 7, upon an ex-parte application moved on behalf of Kpokpogri by his lawyer, Chief Mike Ozekhome SAN.

Specifically, after listening to Ozekhome, the presiding judge issued an order of interim injunction restraining the defendants either by themselves, agents, officials, privies, or all those purporting to have derived title from them.

Other persons were howsoever called from trespassing on or further trespassing on, demolishing, or further demolishing the property known as Plots 203 and 204, 27 Road, Gusape District, Apo Estate, Abuja, covered by letters of allocation issued by the Federal Housing Authority with Ref. No. FHA/BD/ES/APO/P.203 and Ref. No. FHA/BD/ES/APO/P.204.

The judge further ordered stoppage of evicting the occupants of the said property or in any way interfering with the plaintiff’s exclusive right of possession of the said property pending the determination of the motion on notice.

Meanwhile, the court has adjourned the hearing of the matter to September 12. At a resumed sitting, the Plaintiff’s counsel, Richard Ebie informed the court that he was served by Yusuf Abubakar’s counsel, representing the 1st to 4th Defendants, with counter affidavits that contained so many denials.

In view of that, Ebie informed the court that he would be filing a further and better affidavit.

Sensing an adjournment, Ebie appealed to the court for an extension of the time of the restraining order.

He argued that if the time was not extended, there would be the likelihood that the subject matter of the substantive suit will be destroyed or rendered nugatory.

But the Defendants’ counsel opposed, insisting that Ebie ought to have filed a formal application to that effect.

However, in its ruling, the court agreed with the Plaintiff’s counsel that the restraining order needs to be extended.

Justice Agbaza held that the injunctive order made on July 7, was to the effect that it would last pending the hearing and determination of the motion on notice.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here