Court Orders Developer to Remove Houses Worth Billions of Naira

Tobi Soniyi

An Abuja High Court has ordered a developer, White Diamond Property Development Company, to remove seven units of five-bedroom duplex worth N350 million each from a piece of land in Abuja.

The court also awarded the sum of N10 million as damages against the developer of the property as penalty for encroaching on a piece of land belonging to Trade Wheels Limited.

Justice Peter Kekemeke ordered the developer to, at its own expense, remove all structures or building erected on the land as well as any building materials, sands and gravels.

In a 22-page judgment delivered on June 15, 2017 and obtained by THISDAY at the weekend, Justice Kekemeke held that Trade Wheels had established its right over the property.

The judge said the plaintiff also succeeded in persuading the court that the defendant encroached on its land.
“It is my view, the plaintiff has proved that the defendant trespasses in its land, and I so hold,” he said.

The court consequently issued an order of perpetual injunction restraining White Diamonds and its agent from further encroaching on the land or in any way or manner interfere with the statutory rights and interests over the said property.

Counsel to the defendant, A. O. Okpalah, had argued that his client in 2010 applied to the then Minister of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) for an extension to cover the landed property in contention.

He also argued that his client by a letter dated 3/12/2010 requested for an extension of the plot of land in contention and same was granted by the minister via a letter dated 19/3/2010.

However, the court observed that the evidence tendered by the defendant’s witness, Rabiu Isiaku, supported the case of the plaintiff.

“His testimony was a clear admission of trespass.
“In his evidence, the witness stated that he was granted the subject matter by the Minister of the FCT. In my view, once a Certificate of Occupancy (C of O) is produced, it is a prima ficie evidence of title.

“The land, the subject matter of this suit was allocated to the plaintiff on October 19, 1994, while the defendant’s land was granted to it on November 2, 2010. The above evidence supports the plaintiff’s case. It is a clear admission of trespass. In my view, the plaintiff has established exclusive possession vide exhibits A and A1,” the court held.
According to the judgment, trespass to land constitutes the slightest disturbance to the possession of land by a person who cannot show a better tittle.

“The plaintiff’s tittle is in first time, the defendant’s C of O is not clear and readable,” the judge held.