Court gavel
Abuja High Court has postponed the hearing of a motion seeking punitive sanctions against parties accused of flouting an existing court order in the ongoing dispute over the Apo Resettlement Market Scheme.
The case will now be heard on November 13, following the absence of the presiding judge, Justice Yusuf Halilu, who was unable to take up the matter.
At the heart of the dispute is Plot 1729, Cadastral Zone E27, Apo District, where a multi-billion-naira market development project is underway.
The claimants — AMAC Investment Development Company and two others — had dragged Dr. Shuaibu Omeiza Musari and Techs and Concrete Nigeria Limited before the court over the project.
Justice Halilu had, in a ruling delivered on April 15, issued an interlocutory injunction restraining all parties, especially the claimants, from carrying out any further construction on the site pending the determination of the substantive suit (marked CV/467/2024).
The injunction was granted following an application by Techs and Concrete Nigeria Ltd, which sought to preserve the status quo.
However, counsel to the respondents, Realwan Okpanachi, alleged that despite the court’s directive, the claimants continued construction work in defiance of the April order.
In their motion, the respondents are urging the court to impose a ₦850 million punitive or exemplary cost on the claimants for allegedly disregarding the injunction.
They are also seeking an order for the demolition of any structures already erected in violation of the court’s order.
Alternatively, the respondents requested that the court direct the Inspector-General of Police, the FCT Commissioner of Police, and the Director-General of the Department of State Services (DSS) to seal off the disputed site to maintain the status quo and ensure full compliance.
In a supporting affidavit, Techs and Concrete Nigeria Ltd claimed that even after the April 15 order was duly served and pasted at the project site, the claimants allegedly removed the notices, erased all visible inscriptions, and resumed construction, showing blatant disregard for the court’s authority. The company warned that unless the court enforces its order, such acts of contempt would undermine the sanctity of judicial decisions.
The firm further explained that a joint venture agreement had initially been executed between Techs and Concrete and Manillah Integrated Partners Ltd, under which Techs and Concrete served as financier, co-developer, and sole marketer, while Manillah acted as the developer.
Techs and Concrete accused Manillah and its associates of breaching that agreement by unilaterally proceeding with the market development and later filing a suit to evade accountability.
Justice Halilu, in his earlier ruling, had emphasized that the injunction was granted “in the interest of justice and fair play.”
(NAN)
