In a landmark ruling, a Federal Capital Territory High Court has quashed a lease agreement granted to Basic Properties Limited by the Federal Capital Development Authority (FCDA). The court determined that the lease was void and unenforceable because it infringed on the existing rights of earlier claimants.
The dispute centered on Plot 9 in Cadastral Zone, Lokogoma District, which forms part of Plot No. 6 in the same district. Basic Properties Limited had secured a lease from the FCDA while a previous lease held by the plaintiffs, Mr. Akindeji Akinade and another party, remained active. The plaintiffs sought judicial intervention to invalidate the subsequent lease and the sale of plots by Saraha Homes Limited to members of the Incorporated Trustees of Lokogoma Basic Estate Owners/Residents Association.
Justice Angela Otaluka presided over the case. After hearing arguments from Dr. Lilian Ojimma, counsel for the plaintiffs, and representatives of the defendants, she dismissed the counterclaim lodged by the residents’ association. The judge stated that the association members had failed to conduct proper due diligence before purchasing land from Saraha Homes Limited, rendering them trespassers with no valid title.
In her judgment, Justice Otaluka declared that the lease issued to Basic Properties Limited—covering the land referred to as Plot 9 in Cadastral Zone C09, Lokogoma District—was null and void because it was created while the claimants’ rights under their prior lease agreement were still subsisting. She emphasized that this action violated the offer letter, the lease terms, and the principles enshrined in the Nigerian Constitution and the Land Use Act.
The court further held that Saraha Homes Limited’s entry onto the land constituted unlawful trespass. Consequently, an order was made setting aside the subsequent lease granted to Basic Properties Limited. The judge noted that the FCDA and the Minister of the Federal Capital Territory (third and fourth defendants) failed to provide any credible reason for creating a new lease while a valid prior lease existed, amounting to a breach of contract.
Additionally, the court mandated the defendants to pay general damages of ₦2.5 million to the plaintiffs for trespass, along with ₦5 million to cover costs, disbursements, and legal fees associated with the suit.