13/04/2026
This morning, the High Court of Delta State, sitting in Asaba delivered a Judgment (in our client's favour) setting aside a purported revocation of our client's land situate in Asaba, made by the Delta State Government and it's agency; and consequently awarded, in our client's favour, damages in the sum of N10m for the unlawful revocation. This decision brought to a final determination, a four-year legal battle between our client and the Delta State Government and its Agency (DDPA).
The meat of the case is that the Delta State Government Agency, Delta Development and Property Authority (DDPA) had, in 2014, granted the 1st Claimant (our client's predecessor in title) a 98-year sub-lease over a Plot of land situate in Asaba, Delta State.
Sometime in 2021, the original allottee sought to transfer/sale the plot to our client (the 2nd Claimant) and approached DDPA for consent to enable him assign the unexpired residue of his grant to our client. Consent was stipulated in the original Deed of sub-lease between DDPA and the original allottee as a condition precedent for sale/assignment to a third party.
Before giving consent to assign, DDPA demanded and received the sum of ₦290,000.00 as consent fee from our client and his predecessor in title.
Despite formally granting [written] consent to assign on 9th September 2021, with a one-year window within which our client is to register the Deed of assignment, the DDPA, in a subterfuge, strangely revoked the plot barely six months after the consent vide a newspaper publication dated 28th March 2022, falsely citing an Airport Authority takeover of the land as the 'public purpose'/reason for the revocation.
We sent a Demand/Pre-action to DDPA notifying them of our intention to sue and challenge the revocation, while also contending that the plot in question was nowhere near the Asaba Airport quoted, and that the airport had been in existence long before the original allocation.
In a subterfuge, the DDPA, by a second Newspaper publication made on 14th September, 2023 contradicted themselves by publishing that the plot was no longer part of the lands taken over for airport use, but insisted that the land stood revoked, for no reason.
Apparently realising the blunder made in the second Newspaper publication, DDPA, yet again, made a third Newspaper publication on the 12th of October, 2023, stating afresh that the plot in issue had been revoked, reiterating that the plot was not part of the lands taken over for airport use. Again, no reason for the revocation was adduced in the 3rd publication.
Dissatisfied with the purported revocation(s), we approached the High Court of Delta State, on behalf of our client, seeking declarations that the 2nd Claimant (our client) is entitled to the sub-leasehold of the land; that the purported revocations via newspaper publications are invalid, unlawful, and void; and that DDPA was estopped from revoking the land, having requested for, and received consent fee, and having duly granted consent to assign.
We further sought orders setting aside the revocation; mandating the registration of our client's Deed of Assignment; of perpetual injunction restraining DDPA and the Delta State Government from ever re-allotting the land or disturbing our client's enjoyment of the peaceful and quiet possession of the land; and general and exemplary damages.
At the trial, we contended that the purported revocations made by DDPA with neither prior nor proper notice served on the Claimants, nor justifiable reason (or at all), and without fair hearing given to the Claimants, are not only unlawful, but a nullity.
We also contended that the purported contradictory revocations,
apart from being incompetent, were made just after the DDPA had
demanded for, and received the sum of N290,000 from the 1st Claimant as
Consent Fee for the 1st Claimant to assign the property to the 2nd Claimant, and barely 6 months after DDPA had indeed given the Consent to the 1st
Claimant to assign the property to the 2nd Claimant within 1 (One) year, and have same perfected within the said 1 (One) year. We argued that by the wordings of the consent (which was specified to expire after 1 (One) year from the date of grant) the time within which to perfect was still running at the time DDPA cut it short by the
purported revocation. We therefore argued that DDPA's revocation/action was caught up by the equitable doctrine of estoppel.
In their defence, the DDPA changed their goal post, and claimed, for the very first time in their Defence, that the reason for the revocation was the original allottee's failure to develop the property within 5 years from the date of grant as stipulated in the original sub-lease. We argued that assuming, without conceding, that the original allottee was in such default, the 5 years period to develop expired in 2019. Yet, the DDPA, knowing full well about the default, still went ahead to give the consent to assign in 2021. They were therefore outrightly estopped from making that claim.
The Court agreed with us in entirety and upheld our contentions; holding that DDPA acted arbitrarily and in gross violation of the terms of the original sub-lease, as well as the principles of equity by making the purported revocation.
Accordingly, the Court granted all the declaratory and injunctive reliefs we sought and awarded general and exemplary damages in the sum of N10m with post-judgment interest of 10% per annum in favour of our client.
When our client, who resides in the United States, came to us over this case, he expressed extreme worry about his chances of success in the case given the general notion of corruption in Nigeria, more so as the case was against a government and its agency.
This decision is a testament that despite the fears and general perception out there, there are still upright Judges who would stand by justice no matter whose ox is gored, and that the court remains the last hope of the common man.
Chikodi Okeorji
