CaseLaw
Omojasola V. Plison Fisko (Nig.) Ltd. (1990) CLR 6(d) (CA)
Judgement delivered on Thursday, 7th June, 1990
Brief
Facts
The facts of this case are straight-forward and not in dispute. By a floating debenture deed entered into between the 1st respondent and the 2nd respondent the former secured the loan in the sum of N5,100,000 in favour of the latter.
On 29/12/83 the 2nd respondent, by virtue of powers contained in a floating debenture deed, appointed 3rd respondent a receiver/manager over the assets of the 1st respondent when the repayment of the loan and the interest thereon fell in arrears. The said appointment was duly registered on 29/12/83. The 3rd respondent, after his appointment, went into possession and commenced disposing of the assets of the 1st respondent in order to realise the security of the 2nd respondent.
The appellant took a writ of summons against the assets of the 1st re¬spondent, and on 26/5/86 obtained judgment for the sum of N32,064.30. Subsequently, after obtaining judgment, appellant took out a writ of execu¬tion against the assets of the 1st respondent which were then in the posses¬sion of the 3rd respondent; but the execution could not be effected because the appellant could not locate any assets of the 1st respondent which as al¬ready noted, were then in the possession of the 3rd respondent.
On 25/1/88, the 3rd respondent applied to the Federal High Court, Ilorin by originating summons for an order under section 337 of the Companies Act, 1968 that direction be given to determine whether the appellant is enti¬tled to be admitted as a preferential creditor in respect of the whole or some, and if so, what part of the sum of =N=32,064.30 which was the judgment sum awarded in favour of the appellant against the 1st respondent by the Kwara State High Court on 25/5/86.
After counsel's submissions and due consideration of the application the [earned trial court ruled that the appellant was not entitled to be admit¬ted as a preferential creditor in respect of the whole or some of the said judg¬ment sum of N32,064.30. Being dissatisfied with the ruling, the appellant has now appealed to this court.
Issues
Whether the trial Judge was right in holding that the appellant was not entitled...