https://bio.site/dapurtoto1

https://linkr.bio/dapurtogel

https://heylink.me/dapurtoto88/

https://bio.site/dapurto88

https://potofu.me/dapurtoto88

toto togel 4d

situs togel

10 situs togel terpercaya

10 situs togel terpercaya

situs toto

bandar togel online

10 situs togel terpercaya

toto togel

toto togel

situs togel

situs togel

situs togel

situs togel

bandar togel

situs togel

bo togel terpercaya

situs togel

situs toto

toto togel

situs togel

situs togel

situs toto

situs togel

https://www.eksplorasilea.com/

https://ukinvestorshow.com

https://milky-holmes-unit.com

toto togel

situs togel

slot online

Court Restrains Enugu Lawmaker Over Alleged Land Grabbing

2 Min Read

An Enugu High Court presided over by Justice E. N. Alukwu has restrained an Enugu lawmaker, Mr Emeka Madu, from further trespassing or selling of a portion of land in dispute in the state capital.

Madu is representing Igboeze South in the Enugu State House of Assembly.

Ruling in a motion ex-parte in suit no. E/50/2020, Alukwu also restrained the defendant/respondent, his agents, privies and workmen from obstructing, destroying or erecting any structure on any portion of the disputed land.

The court ordered for hearing notice to be issued on the defendant and adjourned the case until June 24, for all pending motions.

READ ALSO:Sri Lanka’s Elections Set For Aug. 5, After been Postponed Twice

It would be recalled that the plaintiffs Chukwuani Afamefuna, Chukwuani Kenechukwu and Chidera Okoye had dragged Madu to court over a disputed land situated at Artisan Market, Asata, Enugu.

The plaintiffs in their statement of claims averred that since 1970, they had been in continuous possession of the piece of land measuring 8,860.67 square meters through their predecessor in-title, Alhaji Zubairu Isa.

They said that the land originally owned by Nigeria Railway Corporation (NRC), was allocated to Isa in 1970 under Temporary Occupation License by NRC.

The plaintiffs said that upon the death of Isa, his son Muazu Zubairu transferred all his interest in the land to the plaintiff’s late fathers as joint owners by virtue of an agreement dated July 13, 2000.

They averred that their late fathers jointly applied for a change of ownership which was approved through a letter dated Aug. 8, 2000.

They claimed that sometime in 2019, some concerned neighbours informed them that the defendant had broken into the property, removed all our tenants and pulled down all lockup stores in the premises with earth-moving equipment.

They averred that upon confronting him for trespass, the defendant threatened to use his federal might to arrest them.

Share this Article