Justice Daniel Osiagor of the Federal High Court in Lagos State, has granted an order of interlocutory injunction, restraining a company, Gray Mineral Limited, its Chief Executive Officer (CEO) Mr George Oni, and its directors and agents, from tampering with the firm’s assets.
The court said the order is pending the conclusion of a suit against it, which was brought by a petitioner company, Bale & Stark Limited over alleged debts.
Justice Osiagor made the order of interlocutory injunction, while granting a motion for the order, filed by the petitioner’s counsel in the suit marked FHC/L/CP/1667/2024.
Prior to the issuance of the order for the interlocutory injunction, Justice Osiagor after listening to submissions made by the lead counsel for the petitioner, Obafemi Oluwole, Esq, had dismissed a counter affidavit filed by the respondent.
In dismissing the counter-affidavit, the judge in a ruling held that “The counter-affidavit to the application concedes to the investment of the petitioner allegedly used in purchasing some assets in the Respondents.
“The balance of convenience therefore tilts in favour of the grant of this application pending when the hearing of the substantive suit or amicable repayments to the Petitioner. Order 28 Rule 20 of the Federal High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules 2019 empowers the Court to preserve property or subject matter of an action.
“The legal right of the Applicant to this motion coupled with the balance of Convenience favours a grant of same See Buhari V Obasanjo (2003) 7 NWLR – PART 850 at 648.”
Upon dismissing the respondent’s counter-affidavit, the judge went ahead and granted the petitioner’s motion for orders of interlocutory injunction against the firm and its alter egos.
In granting the order, Justice Osiagor held that: “upon reading the Affidavit in Support, the Exhibits attached and the Written Address dated and filed on the 24th September, 2024, in the Federal High Court registry,
“It is hereby ordered as follows: “that an order of interlocutory Injunction is granted restraining the respondent, its Directors, agents, servants and privies from tampering with, alienating, transferring or otherwise appropriating any Respondents’ fixed and immovable assets however described and called pending the hearing and final determination of the Petitioner’s substantive suit.”
The court said the order serves as a directive to the company, and all the banks/Financial Institutions wherein the monies of the respondents are domiciled not to tamper with it dissipate any funds of the Respondent or its Directors in its possession, not to tamper with or alienate the said funds pending the determination of the matter, in court otherwise they shall be made to face contempt proceedings accordingly.
The judge thereafter adjourned the matter to May 27, 2025, for report of settlement or hearing of the substantive petition.