-
a
A Declaration that the appointment of the second Defendant by the first Defendant as a Receiver in respect of the properties situate, lying and being at Plot C20, Alakoso Avenue, Amuwo Odofin Scheme Apapa and No. 7 Akin Osiyemi Street, Off Allen Avenue ikeja respectively is illegal, unconstitutional, null and void and of no effect whatsoever.
-
b
A Declaration that the forcible entry into the plaintiff's factory and office situate at Plot C20, Alakoso Avenue Amuwo Odofin Scheme, Apapa and No. 7 Akin Osiyemi Street, Off Alien Avenue, Ikeja respectively by Defendant and their agents with arms, cutlasses, matchets and other dangerous weapons Is unlawful, illegal, unconstitutional, null and void and of no effect whatsoever.
-
c
A Declaration that the Defendants no right to take possession of the plaintiffs factory and office save in accordance with due process and law.
-
d
A sum of #200m Naira only being special and general damages jointly and severally for unlawful and forcible entry and closure of the plaintiff's factory and business premises by the Defendants, their agents, servants and/or officers.
-
e
An injunction restraining the Defendants, their agents, servants, privies or officers or any person or body of persons howsoever from continuing the acts of trespass and from advertising in any national newspaper the appointment of the second Defendant as a Receiver to dispose the plaintiffs property.
Appellant followed the above suit with an application for interim injunction restraining the 2nd respondent from taking over the appellants company pending the hearing of the application for interlocutory injunction which sought the same reliefs, which interim order was granted by Mustapha J. (as he then was). Upon service of the interim order on them on 13/7/99, the respondents withdrew from the premises of the appellant and filed an application on 14/7/99 in the court praying for the discharge of the said interim order of injunction.
On the 14tn day of February, 2001 the trial court delivered a ruling on the applications – (a) for interlocutory injunction and (b) discharge of the interim order of injunction in which it discharged the interim injunction and dismissed the application for an order of interlocutory injunction pending the determination of the suit.
Meanwhile with regards to the proceedings in FHC/L/CS/777/99, on the 9th day of August 1999, Hon. Justice Odunowo ordered appellant not to temper with any of the 214 chattels including vehicles listed in the second schedule to the Deed of Mortgage Debenture whether by way of sale, transfer or other dispositions pending the hearing and determination of the applications before the court.
The ruling of Mustapha J. (as he then was) in FHC/L/CS/803/99 delivered on 14/2/2001 resulted in an application by appellant before that court praying for an order of stay of execution and/or injunction filed on 22/2/2001 which the trial court dismissed vide a ruling delivered on 10th September, 2001.
Being dissatisfied with the above ruling, appellant filed a similar application at the Court of Appeal dated 14th September 2001 - for stay of execution and/or injunction, - which application was also dismissed on 18th December, 2002 resulting in the instant appeal before this Court.
