Real estate Subscribers seek to wind up property firm – Some subscribers of an Ikorodu property owned by Brickwall Global Investment Limited have urged the Federal High Court in Lagos to wind up the firm.
They also petitioned the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) over the firm’s alleged refusal to refund them.
The petitioners are Mr Lawrence Imolode, Mrs Saffron Imolode, Mr Zephaniah Nwokeji, Mr Chukwuebuka Ezeocha (for himself and Mrs Ezeocha) and Mr Chukadibia Nwadialo (for Himself and Mrs Elsie Nwadialo)
In the action numbered FHC/L/CP/778/2020, the petitioners said sometime in 2016, the respondent obtained N5,780,000 from them on the pretence that it would grant possession of a piece of land each at its May Flower Estate in Ikorodu, Lagos.
The petitioners said they paid the following sums: Imolode, N1,080,000; Mrs Imolode, N1,080,000; Mr Zephaniah Nwokeji, N1,380,000; Ezeocha, N1,040,000, and Nwadialo, N1, 200,000.
According to them, over two years after payment, Brickwall Global Investment has neither allocated their land to them nor refunded them.
They said the property firm, “without cause or justification has refused to give the petitioners possession of the respective parcel of land they purchased”.
The petitioners, through their lawyer Mercy Elvis Asia of George Etomi & Partners, said Brickwall Global Investment failed to return their money despite several demands to that effect.
They said in their statement of facts: “On the 27th January 2020 the respondent in its letter acknowledged that the first, second, third and fourth petitioners each paid a sum ranging between N1,200,000, N1, 104,000 N900, 000 respectively. It, however, failed to mention anything about the fifth petitioner.
“In the petitioners’ solicitors’ letter dated 18th February 2020, the respondent’s assertions above were refuted.
“The petitioners reiterated their demand for the above sum from the respondent with a warning that a winding-up petition would follow should the respondent fail to meet their demands.
“Since the petitioners’ solicitors’ letter aforesaid, the respondent has failed, refused and or neglected to refund the petitioners’ monies and its posture is that it is unable to pay or meet up its obligations to the petitioners.
“The respondent is indebted to the petitioners in the total sum of N5, 780,000. The respondent is insolvent and unable to pay its debt.
“The petitioners’ dream of owning a home has been thwarted. In the circumstances, it is just and equitable that the respondent is wound-up.”
The petitioners are, therefore, praying the court to wind up Brickwall Global Investment under the provisions of the Companies and Allied Matters Act Cap. C20 LFN. 2004.
They are praying that its assets be disposed-off to offset the indebtedness.
The petitioners are further praying for an appointment of an official receiver of the court as a provisional liquidator.
In a motion on notice, the petitioners are praying for an order of interlocutory injunction restraining the respondent and/or its directors or agents “from alienating, disposing of, dealing in, tampering or interfering with the assets and properties of the respondent, including tangible and intangible assets, movable and immovable assets, as well as liquid assets, stocks, securities and/or monies, whatsoever, pending the determination of this petition.”.
They are also praying for an order granting them leave to advertise the winding-up petition in a national newspaper in accordance with the Winding Up Rules 2001.
The petition and pending motions, filed on June 30, are yet to be heard.
