HomeLocal NewsKano Govt to pay N8.5bn for demolished property

Kano Govt to pay N8.5bn for demolished property

Date:

Related stories

Nigerian Newspapers: Top 10 Stories to Start Your Wednesday Morning

Nigerian Newspapers Summary Good morning! Here is today’s summary from...

Kano govt bans unauthorized chainsaw use, launches permit system

The Kano State Government has banned the unregulated use...

FG unveils approved subjects for basic, secondary schools

The Federal Government has unveiled the official subject offerings...

Nigerian Newspapers: Top 10 Stories to Start Your Tuesday Morning

Nigerian Newspapers Summary Good morning! Here is today’s summary from...

Gov Yusuf inaugurates Shura Council in Kano

Kano State Governor, Abba Kabir Yusuf, has inaugurated a...
spot_img

Justice Sanusi Ma’aji of the Kano High Court has ordered the Kano State government to pay N8.5 billion to Lamash Properties Limited, the owner of a multi-million naira complex demolished by the state in June 2023.

The court also instructed the defendants, including Kano State government, Governor Abba Kabir Yusuf, and the state Attorney General and Commissioner for Justice, to pay an additional N10 million for the cost of filing the case.

READ ALSO: Kano Govt inaugurates Caretaker Committee for ANCOPSS

The plaintiff, represented by Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN) Nureini Jimoh, argued that the demolition of the property, which stood on the site of the former Daula Hotel, was unjustified. Jimoh insisted that the property had been lawfully obtained through an agreement with the administration of former Governor Dr. Abdullahi Ganduje.

The plaintiff sought a declaration that the agreement made under Ganduje’s leadership remained valid, enforceable, and should stand, despite the actions of the current administration. Justice Ma’aji, agreeing with the plaintiff’s stance, awarded the N8.5 billion as compensation for the value of the property, which has already been demolished and cannot be restored.

In defense, counsel for the defendants, Ibrahim Wangida, argued that the judgment was delivered in default, as the court had ignored their motion to set aside the hearing. Wangida claimed the court was not supposed to proceed without considering the pending applications, adding that the defense was unaware of the hearing date. He further contested that the judgment was based on an incorrect service of hearing notice to a person not involved in the case, arguing that this led to a decision made under false pretenses.

Wangida confirmed that the defendants have filed a motion to set aside the judgment and are requesting a new hearing date to address the pending motions related to the case.

Subscribe

Latest stories

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here