Justice Akintayo Aluko of a Federal High Court, has adjourned July 16, for hearing of debt recovery suit filed against MTN telecommunication Limited over alleged unpaid debt of N180, 946, 560 billion.
The judge fixed the hearing date on Monday, after parties in the suit appeared through their counsel before the court.
Applicants in the suit numbered FHC/L/CS/1004/2015, are: Access Bank Plc, and three other firms, Multi-links Telecommunications Limited; Capcom Telecoms Limited and Cyancom Limited, which are in receivership.
The applicants through their lawyer, Mr. Kunle Ogunba, SAN, had dragged MTN Telecommunication Limited before the court over inability to pay its indebtedness amounting to N180, 946, 560 billion.
At the resumed hearing of the matter, whilst Ogunba, appeared for the Access Bank Plc, Augustine Okafor with Chidera Mbaogu, appeared for MTN, and Modesty Ikpechi, appeared for Hoop Telecommunications, a party seeking to be joined in the suit, which was represented by Brenda Iheonie, the company secretary of Hoops Telecoms limited.
Counsel to Hoop Telecommunications, the party seeking to joined, Ikpechi, informed the court of that his client’s application for joinder dated June 19, 2025, adding that a similar suit is pending before Justice Dipeolu, of the same division of the court.
He further told that his client is a necessary party to the suit and they became aware of the suit via a newspaper publication of June 11, 2025.
And that his client is beneficiary to the purported debt the plaintiff is seeking to recover.
In his submission, MTN lawyer, Okafor, informed the court that they became aware of the suit via a newspaper publication of June 11, 2025. Adding that they have not been served with the Originating processes in this suit and prayed that they be served in court.
In his response, plaintiff’s counsel, Ogunba, informed the court that the defendant clearly told him not to serve him the process due to the possible settlement.
He further informed the court that: “we are eager to go on with the case if the defendants are not inclined to amicable settlement”.
He thereafter prayed the court for a date to enable parties finalize on settlement and possibly proceed with the suit should settlement fail.
Responding to Ogunba’s submission, MTN lawyer informed the court that he is not aware of any settlement, he thereafter urged the court to order the service of the plaintiff’s originating processes in the interest of justice .
Subsequently, counsel for the party seeking to be joined, Ikpechi prayed the court for an adjournment for the hearing of their motion for joinder.
READ ALSO: EDUCATIONAL DEVT: Delta students win National Debate
Consequently, Justice Aluko adjourned the matter to July 16, 2025, report of settlement and further proceedings .
It will be recalled that the plaintiff, Access Bank Plc, though its lawyer, Ogunba had on approached the court for some interim injunctions against MTN telecommunication Limited.
Specifically, the plaintiff had asked the court for the followings: “An order of interim injunction restraining the defendant jointly or severally from withdrawing, tampering with or otherwise dissipating the funds in its entire accounts in any financial institution within Nigeria in the sum of N180.946billion being the outstanding mammoth’ indebtedness of the defendant to the 2nd plaintiff, pending the hearing , and final determination of the Motion on Notice as filed in this suit herein.
“An order of interim injunction restraining the Defendant from dealing with, dissipating, transferring, selling or however tampering with any of their assets (be it movable or immovable), shares, funds in any financial institution (howsoever described) pending the hearing and final determination of the Motion on Notice filed in this suit herein.
“An order of interim injunction restraining the all financial Institutions (including but not limited to Banks) within the territorial jurisdiction of this court pending the hearing and final determination of the Motion on Notice filed in this suit herein
“A consequential order of this court directing all banks and financial institutions within the territorial jurisdiction of this court to depose on oath the sums standing to the credit of the defendant in their custody within seven days from being served with a copy of the order of court.
“And for such further or other order(s) as this court may deem fit to make in the circumstance.”
Though, the presiding judge declined granting the counsel’s request, rather he told the counsel to serve the respondent with all processes in the suit.
