MORTGAGES PHB LTD & ANOR v. DR OLADIPO OLASIMBO & ORS
April 13, 2025TUNWASHE KABIRU vs. THE STATE
April 13, 2025Legalpedia Citation: (2017) Legalpedia (CA) 99591
In the Court of Appeal
Tue Nov 21, 2017
Suit Number: CA/L/967/2013
CORAM
PARTIES
GABRIEL NTIA APPELLANTS
RESPONDENTS
AREA(S) OF LAW
SUMMARY OF FACTS
The Claimant now 1st Respondent is a limited liability company which invested in the Defendants/Appellant and 2nd Respondent, an investment outfit. The Appellant is the Managing Director and alter ego of the 2nd Respondent. An investment account was opened on behalf of the 1st Respondent with the sum of N 200,000,000 for six months tenure at a 20% interest rate, at the expiration of which several demands were made and meetings held demanding payment of the 1st Respondent’s investment. The Appellant defaulted in repaying the sum and it culminated in a Memorandum of Understanding wherein it was agreed that the transfer of properties which was assessed at N170, 000,000.00 (One Hundred and Seventy Million Naira Only), shall be assigned and shall constitute a part settlement of the Company’s indebtedness to the investor. It was further agreed that the outstanding sum of N30, 000,000.00(Thirty Million) payable by the Company to the investor would be paid in two installments. Part of the sum was paid leaving a balance of N10 million which was yet to be paid despite repeated demands hence, the 1st Respondent instituted an action in the High Court of Lagos claiming against the Defendants jointly and severally the sum of N10,000,000.00(Ten Million Naira Only) being the outstanding balance of the indebtedness of the Defendants to the Claimant, interest on the said sum at the rate of 21% per annum till judgement is delivered and thereafter a post judgement interest of 15% per annum until the final liquidation of the judgement debts by the Defendants. The processes were served through an order of substituted service by pasting at the Appellant’s place of business but he contended that he has since relocated his business from the address and was unaware of the suit despite the order for substituted service. The court in entering a summary judgement against him, granted the 1st Respondent’s prayers. The Appellant has appealed against the trial court judgement.
HELD
Appeal Dismissed
ISSUES
Ø Whether from the processes filed by the 1st Respondent, privity of contract, dispute or cause of action was declared.
RATIONES DECIDENDI
CASES CITED
STATUTES REFERRED TO
Companies and Allied Matters Act, 1990

