6th December, 2017
Akin Kuponiyi
Guaranty Trust Bank (GTB) on Wednesday urged a Federal High Court, Lagos, Southwest Nigeria, not to grant a Bond application filed before the court, by the former governor of Oyo State, Rashidi Ladoja, as a security over his property, which the court had granted a leave of protection to the receiver/manager.
The presiding Judge, Justice Rilwan Aikawa had on October 5, 2017, granted leave of protection to the receiver/manager, Mr. Olamide Owolegbon, appointed by the GTB to take possession of a property belonging to Ladoja, pending the determination of a debt recovery suit filed against him and his company
GTB in a bid to recover an alleged debt of N207, 150, 761. 46, had dragged Ladoja alongside his company, Hi-Nutrient International Limited before the court.
At the resumed hearing of the matter on Wednesday, Ladoja’s lawyer, Chief Bolaji Ayotunde (SAN), told the court of Ladoja’s application dated November 29, 2017 filed before the court.
In the said application, Chief Ayorinde urged the court for an order granting leave to Ladoja, to provide a security bond in favour of the Court’s Chief Registrar in the sum of N207, 150, 761. 46 the alleged debt, pending the determination of the suit.
Ladoja also sought an order of the court deeming the bond of N207, 150, 761. 46, issued by the UBA in favour of the court’s Chief Registrar, Lagos, and an order directing GTB to vacate Ladoja’s property together with buildings and appurtenances thereon, situated at 57, Oscar Ibru Way, Apapa, Lagos.
Ladoja also sought an interlocutory injunction, restraining the receiver/manager, Olumide Owolegbon, his agents, servants, privies, workmen howsoever, from selling or disposing off the said property.
Ayorinde also stated that the property was a security and that alternative security has been provided, while court decides merits or demerits of the case, it is to secure and to preserve the money they were demanding.
Ayorinde, therefore urged the court to grant his clients’ application.
Responding, GTB lawyer, Temiloluwa Adamolekun, while urging the court to dismiss Ladoja’s application, said the order that the defendants were seeking was for the court to upturned his earlier order made on October 5, 2017.
He contended further that the suit was not one where bond could be issued as the reliefs sought by the bank were not to claim any money from the defendants, but that the action was strictly for the court’s protection over the receiver/manager appointed by the bank.
Adamolekun told the court that bonds were usually posted where there was a claim for money, adding that the reliefs he sought for were declaration, while the suit was about a protection of the receiver/manager appointed by the bank over a mortgaged property.
In addition, he added that Owolegbon was not court appointed receiver/manager as the duties of the receiver/manager were dedicated and based on the Tripartite Deed of legal Mortgage, his deed of appointment by statute.
“Consequently, the contents of the exhibit attached to Ladoja’s application are false and at variance with the reality of the proceedings and the order of the court. There is no judgement sum anticipated by the bank in this suit by virtue of the reliefs sought by the defendants,consequently the bond is not relevant to the suit, the application is misconceived,” he said.
He added that since the defendants filed the bond application, they had failed to talk to the bank about the loan, and that what the defendants traded for was the property and not money.
Adamolekun also stated that the defendants’ bond if granted, would robbed the court of its jurisdiction.
He, therefore, urged the court not to grant the application.
Justice Aikawa, after listening to the submissions of the counsel of both parties, adjourned till December 15, 2017 for ruling.
It will be recalled that Justice Aikawa had on October 5, granted GTB’s application to appoint Olamide Owolegbon, as its receiver/Manager, on Ladoja’s property located at 57, Oscar Ibru way Apapa, Lagos, due to unpaid debt of N207, 150, 761. 46, pending the domination of the substantive suit.
The judge, also made an order restraining the defendants and the Directors of the company and their agents from frustrating the receiver Manager from exercising all the powers vested in him to perform his duties.