Court awards N8.5 billion against Kano govt over structure demolition
20 December 2024 |
2:27 am
Justice Sanusi Ma’aji of the Kano High Court has ordered the state government to pay N8,511,000,000 to Lamash Properties Limited, owners of the multi-million Naira complex demolished by the administration in June 2023.
Justice Sanusi Ma’aji of the Kano High Court has ordered the state government to pay N8,511,000,000 to Lamash Properties Limited, owners of the multi-million Naira complex demolished by the administration in June 2023.
The court also ordered the defendants (Kano State government, Governor Abba Kabir Yusuf, and the Attorney General and Commissioner for Justice) to pay an additional N10 million for the cost of filing the case.
The plaintiff through its counsel, Nureini Jimoh (SAN), had faulted the state government for the demolition of the property it claimed to have obtained legally via an agreement with the previous administration of Dr Abdullahi Umar Ganduje.
Insisting that the demolition of the property, located on the former Daula hotel was unwarranted, the plaintiff sought a declaration of the court that the agreement entered under Ganduje’s administration was valid, subsisting and enforceable before the counter-decision by the current administration.
Satisfied with the position of the plaintiff, Justice Ma’aji granted the huge sum against the respondents in lieu of the worth of the property. The court ordered that since the buildings already reduced to zero ground could not be restored, its present monetary value should be paid to the plaintiff.
In an objection, the defendant’s counsel, Ibrahim Wangida, argued that Justice Ma’aji’s judgment was delivered in default, having allegedly ignored the motion earlier filed before him to set aside the hearing.
The defence lawyer contended that the court was not expected to sit on the matter in the first instance, saying there was no hearing on its application, and was not aware of the hearing notice where the court delivered judgment.
He, therefore, said the defendants have filed a motion before the court to set aside the judgment, while a new date should be fixed for the hearing of pending motions on the originating summon.
“We filed a preliminary objection on the matter, and a date was given for us to move our motion, but the judge did not sit on the appointed date. Now, when the court fixed another date for hearing notice, we were not served,” the lawyer claimed.
×
Get the latest news delivered straight to your inbox every day of the week. Stay informed with the Guardian’s leading coverage of Nigerian and world news, business, technology and sports.
0 Comments
We will review and take appropriate action.