A Badagry High Court in Lagos State has admitted in evidence the technical report on a property in dispute between a Lagos businessman, Alhaji Azeez Ayomumoye, and the United Bank for Africa (UBA).
At the resumed hearing on Tuesday in a N36.8 million case filed against the bank by the businessman for alleged breach of the lease agreement by the bank, Justice Okikiolu Ighile overruled the objection of the Defence counsel on the document, declaring that it was very relevant to the case.
Counsel to the plaintiff, Mr Qudus Mineye, had pleaded that the technical report be admitted in evidence by the court.
Ayomumoye, a businessman and property owner, took UBA to court, claiming N36.8 million for a breach of deed of the property he sub-let to the bank.
In a statement of claims, Ayomumoye said that a deed of sub-lease which commenced on Oct. 1, 2006, was breached by the bank on his building situated at Plot 15, Aina Layout, Dopemu, Lagos on the Lagos-Abeokuta Expressway.
He said contrary to the deed of sub-lease, UBA wholly demolished the property and erected a new structure without the claimant’s consent or approval.
The businessman is also demanding compensation of N24 million as the cost of restructuring the present building to a multi-purpose building which is similar to what the structure was when the deed was signed.
According to Mineye, when the landlord discovered the breach, he wrote several letters to the bank, requesting for compensation, but the bank ignored it.
Ayomumoye alleged that the bank had in 2008, registered a forged deed of sub-lease, purporting same to be the one executed by him.
He added that the document fraudulently registered by the bank on the property was fundamentally different from the one which was executed by both parties in 2006.
The defence counsel, Mr Collins Obona, objected to the filing of the evidence, noting that it was filled in anticipation of the case and that the witness tended to gain from it financially.
But Mineye said the objection was premature, pointing out that the document was founded on two legs.
“It was not made in anticipation and the witness has no financial gain. So, it is relevant to use this because the case of the claimant is the change of the structure of the building and the document backs up that claim,” he said.
In her ruling, Justice Okikiolu noted that the document was relevant and admissible in court
“The objection of the defense counsel is overruled,”she said.
The case was adjourned to May 3 and May 4 for continuation of trial. (NAN)
