The Federal High Court, Abuja Division, on Wednesday adjourned a suit filed against Iyabo Obasanjo and others over an Abuja property until July 9 for hearing. The suit, which was before Justice Mohammed Umar as of March 30, has now been reassigned to Justice Inyang Ekwo, who had earlier been handling the case.

The matter, which was eighth on the day’s cause list, however, could not proceed and was fixed for July 9 for further mention.

On March 30, when the case came up before Mr Umar, neither the plaintiffs’ lawyer nor the defendants’ counsel was in court, and the case was fixed for June 10.

Mr Umar had, on January 6, fixed March 30 for the matter due to the lawyers’ absence in court.

When the case came up on October 2, 2025, the hearing could not proceed equally.

Counsel for the plaintiffs, Abniyilo Na’allah, had sought an adjournment after being unable to serve the defendants in the suit, as no lawyer appeared for the defence.

The plaintiffs, ABB Electrical Systems Limited and Yohana Margif, had dragged Ms Obasanjo and other co-defendants to court over a property dispute. The property is located at Plot 4254, Cadastral Zone A04, measuring approximately 1.67 ha in Asokoro District, FCT, Abuja.

Other defendants in the suit are the former senator representing the FCT, Philip Aduda; Ismail Iron; John Mbata; Jamaila Sani Alhassan; Altine Jibrin; and unknown persons as the second to seventh defendants, respectively.

The case was formerly before Mr Ekwo, before Mr Umar took over last year, and is now reassigned to Mr Ekwo for adjudication. Mr Ekwo had, on January 28, 2025, refused to grant the ex parte motion filed by the plaintiffs after it was moved by Mr Na’allah.

The applicants had sought an interim injunction restraining the respondents from entering, trespassing on, or altering or modifying the property known as Plot 4254, Cadastral Zone A04.

The plot is approximately 1.67 ha, Asokoro, Asokoro District, Abuja.

The judge instead directed the plaintiffs to put the defendants on notice to hear from them why the prayer should not be granted.

The plaintiffs had filed the motion marked FHC/ABJ/CS/67/2025 dated January 13, 2025, but filed it on January 17, 2025, with Mr Na’allah. In their six-ground argument, the applicants said they were agitated by the fear of the defendants trespassing on or altering their property.

They said they were the rightful owners of the land by virtue of the statutory right of occupancy granted to them. The plaintiffs/applicants said they have been in quiet and peaceful possession of the land without any challenge from the defendants/respondents or anyone at all.

They said it would occasion a serious miscarriage of justice against the plaintiffs/applicants if the defendants/respondents are allowed to tamper with, enter, trespass on, alter, or modify the property belonging to the plaintiffs.

The applicants said irreparable damage would be caused to them if the defendants were not restrained.

Mr Margif, in the affidavit he deposed to, stated that the company was allocated the parcel of land by the Federal Capital Development Administration and that it was covered by a statutory right of occupancy, with a new issue date of May 23, 2006.

He said the company intended to begin developing the land in compliance with the terms of the statutory Right of Occupancy and other applicable rules and laws within the FCT.

He alleged that the recent activities of the defendants, including Ms Obasanjo, who represented Ogun Central Senatorial District between 2007 and 2011, had become worrisome.

Mr Margif urged the court to grant their application in the interests of justice.

(NAN)