Siblings seek Lagos courts order in inheritance dispute over Hotel Comfort

THE daughter of a prominent Lagos hotelier has asked a state High Court to instruct the State Government to take over the administration of her late mothers estate, in a civil suit initiated against her brothers in their dispute over legitimate beneficiaries of the deceaseds property.

At the centre of the dispute over the estate of late Chief (Mrs) Comfort Oboh, who died intestate, is a Lagos property popularly known as Hotel Comfort, situated at No 21, Apapa/Oshodi Expressway, Lagos. It is standing in between Intercontinental and Zenith banks, and directly opposite Ascon Oil depot.

Hotel Comfort, by the records now before the court, comprises all assets encompassing land, buildings, fixtures, fittings, furniture, furnishings, decorations, apputenances, appliances, machinery, utensils, stocks and all other tangible and intangible assets relating to the hotel and its normal trading business, including two plots of land and any property thereon situate by Hotel Comfort, including all that part of the land forming right of way/access road from the Apapa/Oshodi Expressway to the hotel. The said property is said to be worth millions of naira.

Locked in dispute over the property are three siblings, namely, Mrs Josephine Oboh-Priddy, who is seeking the court order, and her two brothers - John and Peter Oboh. The applicant, Mrs Josephine Oboh-Priddy, is seeking the courts intervention in her claim that she has been shut out of the administration of her late mothers estate.

But, the order cannot be except the present administrators of the controversial estate are divulged of their right to do so by the court.

Hence, Oboh-Priddy is among others asking the court to direct both first and second defendants - John and Peter Oboh, to cease functioning as administrators of the estate, on their ground that the first defendant is presently unfit and incapable of managing or administering the vast estate.

That move is, however, being met with a strong resistance from the defendants, who through their preliminary objection, are asking the court to dismiss the originating summons issued by the claimant on the ground that same is vexatious and an abuse of court process. The two defendants are also tasking the court to again dismiss the suit, alleging that it lacks merit.

When the late Chief (Mrs) Comfort Oboh died intestate some years ago, the left behind several properties including Hotel Comfort, with business centre and access road; a block of six flats located at 10 Safianu Street, Olodi-Apapa, Lagos; two plots of land beside Hotel Comfort; two plots of land at Lekki Peninsula Scheme 1; Plot 16, Block 122, Lekki Phase 1 Lagos; and one acre of land at 68, Comfort Oboh Street, Kirikiri Town, Apapa, Lagos. The deceased also left assorted cars, shares in a property company and cash in five different banks, among others.

At a meeting of the beneficiaries after Obohs burial sometime on June 2, 2000, the family resolved that a letter of administration be applied for and obtained and that the proposed administrators/administratix shall be Chief Gilbert Odigie-Oboh, Josephine Oboh-Priddy, Mr. John Oboh and Mr. Peter Oboh.

After the letter of administration was processed, one of the proposed administrators, Josephine, alleged that her name was fraudulently deleted from the document. That led to a suit, initiated by her in 2002, which was amicably settled on out-of-court basis. Justice A.O. Opesanwo held the terms of settlement as the judgment of court.

As endorsed by the court, the applicant was given 25 per cent ownership share of the hotel and free access at all times to the property.

But, according to her, that right is presently threatened due to ill mental state of the first defendant, John, which according to her borders on insanity.

Apart from the alleged mental derangement of her brother, who she claimed is currently sitting over the management of the property, the claimant, in her court process by her counsel, Messrs Olalekan Bolaji of Mobolaji, Sabury and Co., said that by the information at her disposal, obtained through personal enquiries, I am very much aware that the first defendant has started taking serious steps to sell off the Hotel Comfort... as well as certain other properties of the estate at very ridiculous sums and without regard to the provisions of the terms of the judgment of the court.

According to her, all her interest in the estate would be laid to waste if the first defendant was permitted to continue to manage and administer same, adding that by the circumstances of this case, the court has the powers to appoint and authorise an officer of the court or preferably, the Administrator-General of the state, to take over the management and administration of the estate of the late Chief (Mrs) Comfort Oboh and prevent same for being dissipated and wasted.

The respondents, however, through a preliminary objection are asking the court to dismiss the suit in its entirety, arguing that it lacks merit and is an abuse of court process.

In the attached affidavit by the first defendant, John Oboh, the claimants application and originating summons and all other processes did not disclose any reasonable cause of action.

Corroborating that position of the claimant to the effect that the family had once resolved a suit by the applicant, John said that all the issues raised in the present matter had been decided by the said judgment.

He claimed that his sister had once made an attempt to take over the hotel, an attempt, which he allegedly resisted.

On February 25, 2006, the claimant and myself held a meeting over the management of the Hotel Comfort where I resisted the attempt by the claimant to take over the entire management of the hotel and the claimant threatened to remove me as an administrator and to deal with me.

John also claims that his sister at a time brought policemen to the hotel, which made him to write a petition to the Inspector-General of the Police (IGP) and consequently, an investigation was conducted by the Nigerian Police, Lagos Command.

The first defendant said the claimant had raised the issue of his mental capacity and his ability to continue to administer the estate, but had not substantiated the claim.

The trial court has reserved ruling till the end of this month.