Court gavel
The Abia High Court sitting in Umuahia, on Wednesday, dismissed a suit filed against the State Government by the Okwuta Isieke Ibeku Community, Umuahia for “lacking the capacity to stand”.
The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that the suit was filed by Messrs Onuoha Onyecherelam, Ebere David and Onyebuchi Obike, on behalf of the community in Umuahia North Local Government Area.
Joined as respondents in the suit were the Commissioner for Lands, Housing, Survey and Urban Planning and the Commissioner for Justice and Attorney General of the state.
Others were the Director-General/General Manager, Housing Corporation, Umuahia and occupants/occupiers of Ehimiri Housing Estate, Umuahia.
The claimants had, in a suit No:HU/76/2023, sought the recovery of possession of the land “traditionally known as and called Uzo Eke Okwuta Ibeku, presently called Ehimiri Housing Estate, Umuahia”.
They argued that the ownership of the land was settled in their favour in the Supreme Court judgment delivered on May 12, 1972.
They had claimed that the respondents entered into and remained in occupation of the land without their community licence, consent or that of any predecessor in-title of their community.
The claimants thereafter sought a declaration that the possession of all the occupiers and alienation of Uzo Eke Okwuta, presently called Ehimiri Housing Estate, was void, illegal and of no legal effect.
They also sought an order for the recovery of possession of the estate.
The presiding Judge, Justice Uchechi Enwereji, delivered the judgment in favour of the respondents.
Reacting to the judgment, Counsel for the claimants, Mr Uka Okocha, said that they had filed an action to discontinue the originating summons after discovering some procedural defects in it.
Okocha said that they had filed a writ of summons in respect of the subject matter.
However, Counsel for the fourth respondents (occupants of the estate), Mr Okey Kanu, said that the respondents had asked the court to dismiss the suit because it was statute barred.
Kanu said that the claimants’ counsel wanted the suit to be struck out, which they (defendants) opposed but urged the court to dismiss it.
“And that is what the court has done today,” he said.
Responding to the writ of summons filed by the claimants, Kanu said, “You can’t re-institute the suit on that subject matter.” (NAN)
