By Ameh Ejekwonyilo
After 10 months of not filing any defence, the Independent Corrupt Practices and other related offences Commission (ICPC) has filed processes in opposition to a suit, instituted against it at the Federal High Court Abuja, by Pinnacle Communications Ltd (PCL).
pinnacle had in July 2018, dragged the ICPC to court wherein it claimed a whooping N1billion against the anti graft agency for unlawfully withholding its money domicile in Zenith bank without a valid court order.
At the resumed hearing of the matter, on Wednesday, which was assigned to Justice Taiwo Taiwo, counsel to the plaintiff, Oluwole Olatunde had told the court that the matter was for hearing.
On his part, the 1st defendant (ICPC), represented by E.A Shogunle told the court that he had filed his counter processes in opposition to the originating processes, but that he had an application for extension of time to regularize his processes having filed out of time.
But Okey Ojukwu, who announced appearance for the 2nd defendant (Zenith Bank) informed the court that he had filed two applications on May 20, dated same day, in respect of the matter.
Ojukwu said the application was for extension of time to regularize the 2nd defendant’s processes.
The second application according to Ojukwu, was for an order striking out the name of 2nd defendant from the suit, which the plaintiff’s counsel said he would oppose.
Similarly, the 3rd defendant (AGF) through its lawyer, hinted the court that she would be filing processes.
After hearing all parties, Justice Taiwo adjourned the matter to June 27, for hearing of all pending applications.
By the suit marked FHC/ABJ/CS/779/18, dated 23rd July 2018, Pinnacle Communications is seeking “A declaration that the act of the 1st defendant in ordering the 3rd defendant to place a “post-no-debit” restrictions on the plaintiff’s account with the 3rd defendant without any court order and or any valid court order is ultra vires, unlawful, injurious, unconstitutional and a breach of the plaintiff’s right to its movable property.
Pinnacle is seeking “a declaration that the act of the 2nd defendant in placing a “post-no-debit” restrictions on the plaintiffs account number 1012875804 with the 3rd defendant without any court order and or any valid order is unlawful, injurious, unconstitutional and a breach of the plaintiff’s right to its movable property,” among others.