PDP Vs PDP Crises,  Court To Rule On Originating Surmount Of Hon Bitrus Kaze, Ors ,26th Nov

0 152
Subscribe to our newsletter

Yakubu Busari

A suit filed by Hon Bitrus Kaze ,Aminu Zang , Emmanuel Macham and ors against People Democratic Party ,Hon Yakubu Chocho ,Chris Hassan  ,Hon Amos Goyol Gombi and ors seeking the order of the court to stop the caretaker committee from conducting state Congress was adjourned to 26th November 2020 for ruling on issue of substituted service on the first defendant (PDP) .


The counsel for 1st ,6th ,8th,19th ,21st ,23rd to 25th defendants,Barr Niri Darong told the court that 7th ,20th, and 22nd defendants were not represented in court.


Subscribe to our newsletter

The plaintiff counsel,Barr Munir Barau Abdullahi says,My Lord the matter today was slated for adoption of all processes because the application was on the motion on notice was introduced dated 07-08-2020 and filed on the  10-08-2020 seeking for purported service on the originating surmount.


Abdullahi says all their notice service has been served on the first defendant (PDP) through substituted means and to all defendants including all processes of the defendants, we the plaintiff counsel argued in  court,and then they ask for a date to response but my Lord we response on the same issue raise.


Meanwhile, the court adjourned to 31-08-2020 for a hearing on the application on that date the matter couldn’t go on because the defendants from August 31st, 2020, the court order for hearing and counsel for defendants argued.


Barr Barau ,we are banned by the records of this court on 10-08-2020 when counsel for defendants made an oral application before the adjournment to 31-08-2020 for hearing on the application we are most guided.


In his plead before the court ,plaintiff counsel, Barr Barau Abdullahi urged the court that taken cognizant to issue of today it is an originating surmount so that can be taken simultaneously so we have been served with the counter affidavit including that of the 1st defendant so we discountenanced this for lacking in merit .




Barr Niri Darong argued that 2th,6th,8th,19th,21st ,23rd and 25th defendants are opposing to the application on grounds of this application in so doing filed a counter affidavit of 6 paragraphs they’re relying on all the position in the counter affidavit.


He further submitted that prayers sought by plaintiffs were for them to stop the extension of the tenure of the caretaker committee which tenure was to expire at the 1st defendant on 10-08-2020, he explained.


Barr Niri Darong said their tenure expired before the subject matter and the court refused to grant the plaintiff an injunction because the defendants this is an academic exercise but counsel for the plaintiff argued that he has filed a further and better to show that the tenure of the caretaker committee has not elapsed.

However, he challenged that the caretaker committee conducted the congress they are talking about which the plaintiff counsel hasn’t demonstrated that in court, Defense counsel argued.


Barr Niri Darong told the court that the 1st defendant didn’t file any process but it has the counter-affidavit challenging the service process, saying that the party outweighs it right.


Defense counsel argued that determining this motion without the 1st defendant without proper service is also an infringement on the right of the first defendant under section 36 of the 1999 constitution amended.


Darong added that this would among to an academic exercise as of the time this motion was filed they were caretaker committee but counsel for the plaintiff argued that they are moving into the facts citing the case Ezegdu vs FA,TBU 1992 Nigeria weekly law urging the court to discountenanced anything to frustrate or make nonsense in case IKo against Adeleke urged the court dismiss it and strike out the 1st defendant PDP counter-argument dated 1st August 2020.


The defendants filed their counter-argument also discountenanced we are most up large, we have filed a motion on notice dated 16-07-2020 and filed 17-07-2020 draw paragraph 33 rule (1) as a rule of the high court, Plateau 2007 seeking for 5 relief contain ground in respect to this application which is supported by 4 paragraph affidavit deposed by Hon Bitrus Kaze attached are exhibit “A to J” in line with practice direction is a written address attach to the same motion, we rely on the position of the affidavit, we adopt our written address by urging the court to grant plaintiff his application.



Justice M.S Gang of the State High Court sitting in Jos Division has adjourned to 26th November 2020 for ruling on an argument.

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: