The ongoing battle between the Asset Management Corporation of Nigeria, AMCON and billionaire businessman and lawyer, Dr Wale Babalakin over the indebtedness of the latter’s companies to AMCON to the tune of N60bn has taken a new twist.
While AMCON insisted on Wednesday that it had obtained a court order to take possession of two properties linked with Babalakin pursuant to the order made by Justice Chukwujekwu Aneke of the Federal High Court, Lagos in suit no: FHC/L/CS/1501/12, the businessman said that was legally impossible.
AMCON said the properties located on 43A Afribank Street, Victoria Island, Lagos and Plot 270, Trans Amadi Layout, Port-Harcourt, Rivers State were pledged as collateral for loans granted to Roygate Properties Limited, suspected to be one of Babalakin’s companies.
In an advertorial titled; ‘Caveat emptor: Recovery of properties and assets,’AMCON warned the general public against dealing with Babalakin and his companies in relation to the affected properties.
“The general public is hereby notified not to deal or have further dealings with Roygate Properties Limited, Stabilini Visinoni Limited, Homan Engineering Company Limited and Dr. Bolanle Olawale Babalakin, SAN in respect of the properties and assets,” AMCON said.
The Managing Director, AMCON, Mr. Mustafa Chike-Obi, also said that the request by Babalakin that the money he owed should be deducted from what the Federal Government owed some of his firms was not logical because N60bn indebtedness was not to the government, but to private banks.
Babalakin’s company, Bi-Courtney Limited, also on Wednesday raised the alarm over the withdrawal of a court case by AMCON and describing AMCON’s action to take possession of one of the properties belonging to a company in which he was a director as treacherous, monumentally fraudulent and was an abuse of judicial process.
A statement signed by the spokesperson for BCL, Mr Dipo Kehinde, said, “Consistent with this allegation and immediately after Dr. Babalakin’s statement to the press, AMCON hurriedly withdrew the case that had been instituted by its alleged predecessors-in-title, Guaranty Trust Bank Plc.
“GTB had stated on oath that it had sold the property in dispute to a third party, R.E.D. Company Limited, prior to the assignment of the alleged debt to AMCON. This purported sale of the property is being contested at the High Court of Lagos State in proceedings, which are still pending. GTB could, therefore, not have transferred its disputed interest in the property to AMCON. Consequently, AMCON had no interest to enforce in the property.
“The import of the existence of GTB’s suit is that AMCON, through its agents, knew that the subject matter of the ex-parte order on No. 43A Churchgate Street it sought and obtained in the Federal High Court was already an issue before the Lagos High Court and had allegedly been sold by its so-called predecessor-in-title. AMCON’s action at the Federal High Court was, therefore, fraudulent and amounted to a gross abuse of the process of Court.”