Just In...

Wednesday, March 14, 2012

Late Mr Alex Ibru's Widow And Her Husband’s Brother In Court Battle Over Ibru's Company

MORE  facts emerged yesterday on the last days of the late Mr Alex Uruemu Ibru, the frontline businessman and publisher of The Guardian, who died on November 28, last year.

The widow, Mrs Maiden Ibru, relived his last days in court where she has mounted a legal battle to wind up a company owned by her husband and his brother, Mr Goodie Ibru.

The matter came up at the Federal High Court, Lagos.

As Justice Okechukwu Okeke was about making his pronouncement on the submissions by the lawyers, he noticed that Mrs Ibru raised her hand, demanding to be allowed just two minutes to speak, a request the judge granted. At that point, the court went silent.

Mrs Ibru, who was accompanied by one of her children, Toke, told the court why she filed the suit.

"Six months before my husband died, the doctors told me that he was going to die. And for five months, he was out of circulation and nobody saw him and even his family members did not bother about him. 

"Two weeks before he died, he embarked on a hunger strike and when the family members heard about it, some of them came to see him, including Mr Goodie Ibru. When Goodie came, he (the deceased) said he did not even expect he could be talking. 

"Then my husband said he was going to fight him to the finish, dead or alive. That even when he dies, he was going to continue the fight, unless he (Goodie) resigned as the chairman of the company (Tourist Company Nigeria Plc)."

"He said out of all his brothers, the last person that he thought will betray him was Goodie. They had altered some of the company's documents, diverted money and committed all sort of atrocities without the knowledge of my husband. I am a widow and have children to take care of," she said.

Mrs Ibru said while entering the court, she saw her husband who, she claimed, encouraged her to proceed with her actions.

She alleged that her late husband was unhappy with Mr Goodie Ibru and had demanded that he (Goodie) quit his position in one of the companies they jointly owned.

Dressed in a black gown, Mrs Ibru spoke at the hearing of a winding-up petition her lawyer, Dr. Tunji Braithwaite, filed against Tourist Company of Nigeria Plc, jointly owned by her late husband and his brothers.

Mrs Ibru, who sued on behalf of Omamo Investments Corporation (a company owned by her late husband), is seeking to wind up Tourist Company, believed to own the Federal Palace Hotel, Lagos on ground of alleged indebtedness.

She stated in the winding-up petition that Omamo Investments, between 2003 and 2009, lent to the Tourist Company $7.1m, N610m, N381m and N19m, which the company has allegedly been unable to repay.

Mrs Ibru, who claimed to have made several demands on the respondent to no avail, prayed the court to wind up the company for allegedly being insolvent.

She stated that the respondent "has failed beyond resuscitation, has insufficient assets to meet its liabilities, does not have the capacity to meet the conditions for which it was incorporated and has suffered a total erosion of its capital base".

"The respondent is both cash flow and balance sheet insolvent and has not been carrying on effectively, the business of hotelling and catering." 

She averred that the whole substratum of the company is gone and it is impossible to carry on the essential purpose for which it was formed.

Mrs Ibru urged the court to wind up the Tourist Company under the provisions of the Companies and Allied Matters Act, CAP C20 LFN 2004 and appoint a provisional liquidator in the person of the President of the Chartered Accountants of Nigeria (ICAN) or his nominee.

But the respondent has denied Mrs. Ibru's claim and asked the court to dismiss the suit on the ground of incompetence, adding that it discloses no reasonable cause of action and constitutes a gross abuse of the court process.

In a preliminary objection filed by  its lawyer, Onyebuchi Aniakor , the Tourist Company argued that  no grounds, as provided for by law, had been disclosed by the petitioner to justify the commencement of a winding-up proceeding against it.

It said the petitioner had not shown that the alleged indebtedness, the subject matter of the petition, was due for payment or payable by the respondent.

The respondent contended that as against the petitioner's claim, no demand for payment on the alleged indebtedness had been made on it.

Nation

No comments:

Post a Comment

Shop Online From The Comfort Of Your Home Or Office By Clicking On This Banner

Welcome To Obehi Okoawo's Blog...We Love To Hear From You In The Comment Box Above, Thanks