The Federal High Court in Lagos on Friday adjourned
further proceedings till March 28, 2017 in a suit filed against Guaranty Trust
Bank and six others by Miss Oluwatise Aderinokun, daughter of a former Managing
Director of GTBank, the late Olutayo Aderinokun.
Eight-year-old Aderinokun, who sued through her mother,
Mrs. Salamotu Aderinokun, alleged manipulation of her late father’s shares in
GTBank.
Joined as co-defendants with GTBank in the suit are
Datamax Registrar Limited;
Kanali Investments Limited; Day Waterman Company Limited; Caribod Investment
Limited; Mr. Babatunwa Aderinokun; and Investment One Financial Services
Limited.
The young Aderinokun, in her
suit, alleged that the defendants breached the implied contract between them
and her late father, as regards the deceased’s shares in GTBank.
Aderinokun, through her lawyer,
Mr. Osaro Eghobamien (SAN), is urging the court to declare as illegal the
recognition of three limited liability companies – Kanali Investments Limited,
Day Waterman Company Limited and Caribod Investment Limited – as being entitled
to the accruing dividends on her late father’s shares in GTBank.
She wants the court to order an
enquiry into the volume of her late father’s shares in GTBank, held in the
names of the three companies.
She claimed that contrary to her
late father’s instruction, GTBank and Datamax Registrar Limited had paid over
N1bn as dividends in the names of the companies to unauthorised persons, who
were masquerading as the beneficial owners of her late father’s shares in
GTBank Plc.
The payments, the young
Aderinokun claimed, were made to the said unauthorised persons following
various Annual General Meetings held between June 14, 2011 and March 31, 2015.
She is seeking an order of
perpetual injunction restraining GTBank and the rest of the defendants from
acknowledging/recognising the three companies as being the beneficial owners of
the rights accruing to the shares held in their names in GTBank Plc.
At the resumed proceedings in the
case on Friday, counsel for the 7th defendant, Miss M. I. Betty, contended that
any objection raised by the 6th defendant could not be sustained, on the
grounds that there was defect in the counter-affidavit filed by the 6th
defendant.
In his submission, however,
counsel for the 6th defendant, Mr. Olumide Aju, informed the court of his
application, dated March 23, 2017, that urged the court to set aside the
preliminary objection raised by the plaintiff, and allow him to cross-examine a
witness, Mr. Mike Okon.
However, Eghobamien urged the
court to hear his client’s application for interlocutory injunction because
GTBank Plc was about to hold its Annual General Meeting, slated for April 7,
2017.
Egbobamien said his client’s
contention was that since GTBank Plc’s AGM was to hold next week, it was
imperative for the court not to hear defendants’ application on Friday but
rather hear his client’s application for injunction.
After hearing the parties,
Justice Idris adjourned till March 29, 2017, for the hearing of all
applications of second, third, fourth and fifth defendants in the suit.
In his objection to the suit, the
sixth defendant, Babatunde Aderinokun, alleged that the plaintiff’s mother,
Salamotu, was never married to the late Aderinokun.
He identified Olufunlola Kafayat
as the only woman legally recognised as Aderinokun’s wife, with whom the
deceased was said to have contracted a marriage on January 7, 1983, in New
York, United States of America.
Babatunwa also stated that the
plaintiff’s claim that her late father held GTBank Plc’s shares through three
companies namely: Kanali Investment Limited, Day Waterman Company Limited, and
Caribod Investment Limited, was erroneous and inaccurate, as the three
companies were validly constituted and registered under Nigerian law.
He said the deceased could not
have given his GTBank Plc’s shares held in the name of the three companies to
any beneficiaries as claimed by the plaintiff because it was the said companies
and not the late Aderinokun, who owned GTB Plc’s shares.
He added that the will of the
deceased never directed the executors and trustees of the deceased’s estates to
take over or manage any company as erroneously claimed by the young Aderinokun.
He urged Justice Idris to dismiss
the suit with substantial cost against the plaintiff.
Punch
No comments:
Post a Comment