Preliminary Objection Stalls Ruling On Polo Club Case

A preliminary objection  on  Wednesday stalled ruling on an interlocutory by injunction issued  a Port Harcourt High Court presided over by Justice Emma Ogbuji in a suit between Port-Harcourt Polo Club and Nnadi Anyanwu.

Justice Ogbuji had earlier fixed last Wednesday to rule on the interlocutory motion brought before the court by the claimant counsel Barrister Owhendah Okays seeking among other kings to restrict the defendants of  Port-Harcourt club, the chairman and secretary of  Port Harcourt Club, the State  Attorney-General of the State and the lands and Housing Bureau from further trespassing into plot of land situable at no 283A Diobu GRA Phase 11 pending of the determination of the matter in the court.

The claimant motion came following an alleged further encoroachment into the disputed plots of the land by the defendants.

The presiding Judge after listened to the arguments of the claimant and defence counsel as well as state counsel on the motion fixed last Wednesday as the ruling on the motion.

However the matter took another dimension following a preliminary objective brought by the defense council, Barrister Atony Tela in a way of motion for which forced the judge to defile the ruling scheduled for that day.

The defense council in the preliminary objection is asking the court to set aside all the proceeding taken from the claimant for the case and to set out side the ruling scheduled for the day pending the determination of the new motion before court adding that they have served the claimant counsel or copy of the motion.

Responding on the motion the claimant council Barrister Chckwelu Eric who stood in for the lead counsel agreed that they received the motion today at the court premises but maintained that such can not stop the business of the day.

He urged the court to go ahead on the day’s business which is ruling and later consider the new motion.

The presiding Judge, Justice Emma Ogbuji in his ruling agreed to listen to the motion on ground as raised by the defense counsel even when he said he had not seen the motion in question.

“I am yet to see the process; I maintained my stance as in just hearing it for the first time and can not based on assumption but because the claimant council has accepted receiving the motion.”

The presiding Justice while adjoining the case to 11/12/2012 said it would be his discretion to either to hear the new motion only or hear both and give ruling on the new date.