Property recovery case stalls after 4 years of filling

A case of recovery of property said to worth N108 million instituted between two private firms has lingered before an FCT High Court in Jabi four years after hearing commenced. The suit filed by Chandon Nigeria Limited against Mathan Nigeria Limited is over tenancy of a property on Plot 503, Idu Industrial Estate, Abuja consisting […]

A case of recovery of property said to worth N108 million instituted between two private firms has lingered before an FCT High Court in Jabi four years after hearing commenced.

The suit filed by Chandon Nigeria Limited against Mathan Nigeria Limited is over tenancy of a property on Plot 503, Idu Industrial Estate, Abuja consisting of several buildings including a warehouse.

While the matter has been in court since July 24, 2013, several attempts at out-of-court settlement had failed. The court had on November 11, 2016 foreclosed Mathan’s defence and ordered for adoption of written addresses on February, 23, 2016. However, the court did not sit on the date fixed for the adoption and the matter was further adjourned to April 3, 2017 but the court did not sit.

When the matter finally came up on June 8, 2017, Mathan’s counsel asked the court to set aside the foreclosure order against it. 

Ruling for the application was reserved till October 5, but the court did not sit, and matter further adjourned to November 21 for ruling.

Chandon Ltd alleged that after the expiration of the initial two years rent of N43.2m paid by Mathan Ltd, it was notified of an increment from N27m to N36m. But the firm failed to pay despite several notices and decisions conveyed to it since 2013.

As a result, Chandon filed a suit asking the court for an order to evict the defendant from the property and for the recovery of the said property from the defendant. 

The suit is also seeking an order directing the defendant to pay the said weekly prorate rent and the sum of N200,000 as cost of the suit.

In a statement of defence, Mathan, through its counsel Emeka Onyeaka stated that it was ready to renew his rent, adding that it has made efforts for amicable settlement of the issues. The lawyer submits that “purported increment of rent which occasioned the delay is ultra vires the Agreement of the parties and has no basis in law and fact.”