Home / E GIST / Demolition of Oyo House in Abuja waste of state resources – AD Chieftain, Alao tackles Makinde

Demolition of Oyo House in Abuja waste of state resources – AD Chieftain, Alao tackles Makinde

The Enugu Capital Territory Growth Authority, ECTDA, has withdrawn the constructing approval it issued in 2016 to the Chancellor of Coal Metropolis College, Mr. Chinedu Ani for erection of his residence positioned in Plot 5 Onoh Crescent, GRA, Enugu.

A part of the palatial residence was demolished final week by ECTDA for unlawful development on Ekulu water means and blocking of a connecting highway between GRA and Enugu-Onitsha expressway.

Ani, nevertheless, alleged that the demolition of his residence was a results of private disagreement between him and the Chairman of ECTDA, Dr Josef Onoh, whom he accused of being a part of the those who bought the highway and water method to him in 2015.

Ani in an interview through the demolition train accepted that there was a highway that transverse by way of the realm earlier than he constructed on the land, however that the unique homeowners of the property, Rockonoh Property Firm restricted gave him a go forward to shut the highway.

“The Onohs bought the land to me they usually informed me that the highway was created by their father when RCC got here to assemble the property and that their father dismantled the bridge earlier than they bought to 1 Walter Aneke who bought to me; and earlier than I purchased the land I went to them and requested them if I ought to purchase this place as a result of I keep in mind that whereas I used to be a baby there was once a highway there. The one downside is that they needed cash from me,” Ani alleged.

Investigation, nevertheless, revealed that the ECTDA on March 22 2021 withdrew the constructing approval primarily based on sundry allegations in opposition to Ani, together with materials discrepancies within the precise measurement of his plot, pending litigation on alleged default on cost for the plot and lack of proof to help Ani’s legitimate title for possession of the disputed plot.

ECTDA Head of Bodily Planning and Growth Management, Chinedu Ozochioke within the withdrawal discover accused Ani of a number of failures to submit his title paperwork that might have helped the company resolve discrepancies and petitions in opposition to his possession of the plot.

Amongst paperwork obtained is a petition to the Enugu state Governor, Ifeanyi Ugwuanyi, by one Chief Aloysius Maduka who alleged that Ani was illegally occupying his plot with out full cost of N40 million that was agreed as payment for buy of the land and which remains to be a topic of litigation in an Enugu state excessive courtroom.

Maduka additional alleged that the scale of the land he bought to Ani which he (Maduka) remains to be owed N12 million excellent stability was 4,081.72 sq. meters of land as in opposition to about one hectare of land that Ani occupied earlier than the demolition.

Igbos must stop seeking political powers to develop Southeast – Amaechi
🎴Also Read ▶️

“Our consumer’s effort to get the stability of the sum of Twelve million (N12, 000, 000) naira solely, when he got here down from Lagos didn’t yield any fruit. Our consumer is presently counter claiming the above sum in go well with No E/21/14 between Rockonoh Property Firm restricted and 17 others and our consumer has filed a movement to hitch Chinedu Ani and ATCOIE restricted within the mentioned go well with,” Maduka’s counsel petitioned to Governor Ugwuanyi.

In January 2021, Maduka made due his petition by way of a prayer to the Enugu state Excessive Courtroom, asking for an order to hitch Chinedu Ani and ATCOIE Nigeria restricted as defendants due to their acquired curiosity and as vital events for the needs of figuring out points within the controversy of the disputed property.

Maduka supported his petition with an authentic survey plan measuring 3,052.557 sq. meters and a memorandum of understanding between him and Karastan Firm restricted that bought the land to him whereby an extra 1,029.163 sq. meters was additionally bought from the corporate to kind Plot 5 Onoh crescent and which introduced the scale of the land to 4,081.72 sq. meters. He additionally introduced financial institution transaction particulars that indicated that Ani solely paid him N28 million as an alternative of the agreed N40 million land deal.

In one other revelation, the Chairman/ Managing Director of Rockonoh Property Firm restricted, Mr. GB Onoh, had in 2014 approached the courtroom of the then Chief Justice of the state, Harmless Umezulike, who granted his enchantment and issued an order barring any new improvement on the Onoh crescent apart from the constructing approval granted to Chief C.C Onoh in 1976 as registered in No.90 vol.854 at web page 90 in quantity 854 of the land registry workplace at Enugu.

In September 2020, GB Onoh additional petitioned the ECTDA alleging that Ani unilaterally blocked a avenue known as Onoh crescent that led to a bridge, equally known as Onoh Bridge, over Ekulu River that was a hyperlink between GRA and Enugu-Onitsha Expressway.

“Chinedu Ani’s actions, who was not even born when the bridge was constructed, ought to by no means be condoned and will face the identical destiny as others like him who arrogate their particular person pursuits over that of the plenty. His unlawful blockade ought to be introduced down and the Bailey bridge restored,” GB Onoh requested.

In 2015, Rockonoh Property Firm by way of its counsel, Chudi Nwankwo Ozokolo and Associates, wrote to Ani, asking him to take away the “nuisance and obstruction” erected on the bridge and highway at Onoh quarters.

Subsequently, in 2020, the Karastan Firm restricted in response to inquiry from ECTDA wrote to the company authenticating its sale of land to Aloysius Maduka and others, noting that it by no means instantly bought any plot of land to Mr. Chinedu Ani.

BREAKING: Suspected gunmen abduct students, teacher in Edo
🎴Also Read ▶️

“The mentioned Mr. Chinedu Ani in whole disregard to legislation and order engaged on a willful distortion of the non-public property format by unilateral encroachment on our firm’s plot 6 measuring 1,430.762 sq. meters, conversion of Ekulu River pure water means into his property, changing similar to a water fountain in his non-public residence, inflicting undue hardship to all residents within the property whom use similar as a supply of laundry, water and associated important companies for over 45 years,” Karastan firm petitioned.

Overwhelmed by the litany of petitions in opposition to Ani, added to his alleged non-cooperating perspective to the ECTDA, the state authorities company after demolition of the obstructing property, mentioned it was additional moved to withdraw the Constructing No: ECTDA/BP/119/2015 accepted on 24/02/2016 for Ani.

The ECTDA wrote to Ani and mentioned that “Based mostly on the submissions by your predecessors within the title, Messers Rockonoh Property Firm restricted, Karastan Firm Restricted, Chief Aloysius Maduka and Victor Amushi, the scale of your plot is 5081.720 sq. meters, as proven in plan No. DA/EN231/2015 ready by Surveyor P.A. Okoli, of 05/08/2015. Nonetheless, the scale of your plot within the constructing plan submitted to the Authority is 5858.013 sq. meters. You could have been repeatedly requested to submit your title paperwork to the Authority to help us in reconciling this discrepancy however you have got failed, refuted or uncared for to take action.

“The Authority was petitioned by your predecessor within the title, Chief Aloysius Maduka vide a letter dated 18/03/21 and he claims that he has not transferred title to you since you are but to finish cost for the mentioned property. The Authority has additionally been made conscious of the pendency of go well with No: E/21/14 between Rockonoh Property Firm restricted vs. Aloysius Maduka, Walter Aneke and 13 others and a pending movement to hitch you within the go well with which has to do with title to the mentioned land. As it’s, the Authority can’t discover any proof that you just possess a legitimate title to the land in query, therefore this choice.”

When contacted, Ani did not react to the revocation of his constructing approval, however had accused the Chairman of ECTDA, Josef Onoh, of partaking in a vendetta over his refusal to ask him (Onoh) to his birthday celebration.

Ani had additionally alleged that Onoh demanded cash from him over the land transaction which he mentioned he refused, claiming additionally to have purchased the land in dispute instantly from the Onohs’ however which the out there paperwork couldn’t authenticate.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *