Appellate Court declares Adewoyin as IPMAN national president

A three-man panel of the Court of Appeal, Ibadan Judicial division led by Justice Kenneth I. Amadi has upheld the decision of Justice J.O. Abdulmalik of the Federal High Court, sitting in Ibadan where he declared that Chief (Dr) Kolawole Adewoyin, who was elected and sworn in on March 20, 2017 as National Deputy President of the Independent Petroleum Marketers Association Of Nigeria (IPMAN), as deputy to Alhaji (Engr) Sanusi Abdu Fari, is the lawful and rightful person to take over as IPMAN National President in accordance to the principle of automatic succession enshrined in Article IX of the 1997 IPMAN’s constitution.

Justice Abdulmalik gave the judgment in a charge delineated FHC/IB/CS/26/2020, filed by Chief (Dr) Kolawole Adewoyin against three people; Alhaji (Engr) Sanusi Abdu Fari, for himself and on behalf of his self styled National executive council of IPMAN, Alhaji Debo Ahmed and the Registered Trustees of the Independent Petroleum Marketers Association Of Nigeria (IPMAN), praying the court for some declarations and orders.

Ruling on the Originating Summons dated June 25, 2020 and filed on June 26, 2020, the court held further that the continuous occupation of the office of National President of IPMAN by the Alhaji (Engr) Sanusi Abdu Fari, after the expiration of his three years in office is wrongful and a gross violation of Article IX of the Independent Petroleum Marketers Association of Nigeria (IPMAN) 1997 Constitution.

The court held further that Chief Kolawole Adewoyin should be duly sworn in as National President of IPMAN and be recognised as such by the members and Board of Trustees of IPMAN and gave an order of perpetual injunction restraining the trio of IPMAN, Alhaji (Engr) Sanusi Abdu Fari and Alhaji Debo Ahmed or their servants and privies from parading Engr Sanusi Abdu Fari and Alhaji Debo Ahmed as National President and Deputy National President of IPMAN.

It was further ordered that (Engr) Sanusi Abdu Fari, whose tenure expired on March 21, 2017, shall immediately vacate office, deliver and hand over the office to Chief Kolawole Adewoyin, as the duly elected National President of Independent Petroleum Marketers Association of Nigeria (IPMAN) in line with the Article IX of the 1997 Constitution of Independent Petroleum Marketers Association of Nigeria 1997.

But not happy with the decision of the lower court, the three respondents filed a Notice of Appeal on November 26, 2020 predicated on six grounds of appeal; the trial learned judge erred in law when he granted Chief Kolawole Adewoyin’s claim after they have shown through documentary evidence that the office is not vacant as at 2007 as a result of a case pending at the Supreme Court, that the trial judge erred in law by granting the claim without looking at the state of the pleadings and documentary evidence exhibited before the court and thereby committed miscarriage of justice.

They argued further that the trial judge erred in law in granting the claim by not considering the effect of the judgment in Exhibit 501 and 502 annexed to the Counter Affidavit respectively and when he stated that their term of office expired on the 21 day of March 2020 without considering the effect of the law suit which was still pending at the Appellate Court in respect of the office of the Appellants.

Also, they argued that the trial judge erred in law when he stated that the doctrine of Lis Pendis is not applicable in the instant case when there is avalanche of evidence of the pendency of suit on the 30 day of March 2017 and granted the reliefs sought by Chief Kolawole Adewoyin, adding that the judgment is against the weight of evidence.

The three-man appeal panel comprising of Justices A. A. Adumein, Bature Isah Gafai  and Kenneth I. Amadi in an appeal delineated CA/IB/432/2020 gave a consensus judgment upholding the decision of the lower court, arguing that from all the evidences before the court, the fact that the trial judge evaluated the affidavit evidence placed before him in this case is not in doubt.

Justice Amadi held that, “I have already highlighted the issue before the court as the determination of the tenure or term of office of the appellant. Both parties agreed that by the provision of Article IX of the IPMAN Constitution 1997 the tenure/term of office of a National President of IPMAN is for three years or less. The appellant claimed that he was sworn in on the 14/12/2018 as against the 20/3/2017 claimed by the respondent.

“However, there is evidence that he was sworn in on that 20/3/2017 as the National President of IPMAN while the respondent was sworn in as his deputy on that same 20/3/2017. There is evidence that on 15/4/2017, he made appointments in his capacity as the National President of IPMAN and more importantly he authored a letter as the President of IPMAN to His Excellency, President Muhammadu Buhari on 15/1/2018. The question is; if he was sworn in as President of IPMAN on 14/12/2018 how come then, that he performed those functions in his capacity as the national president of IPMAN in the above numerated activities before his claimed date of taking office?

“I hold that the first appellant was sworn in on 20/3/2017 and he resumed office on that same date. His claim of having been sworn in on 14/12/2018 is absolute falsehood. It must be stated and very clearly too, that cases are not won by suppression of facts or outright falsehood. This issue is clearly resolved against the appellant and in favour of the respondent,” the Appellate court held.

On the issue on application of the doctrine of lis pendens, that is, a pending law suit, the court held that “the doctrine of lis pendens does not apply to every suit. It applies to a suit in which the object is to recover or assert title to a specific property. It is important to note that appeal No; SC/15/2018 was filed on the 20/2/2018, about 11 months after the first appellant took his oath of office, therefore as at that 20/3/2017 when the first appellant assumed office; that appeal at the Supreme Court was not filed. Not only that, none of the parties in this suit is a named party in that appeal No SC/15/2018 aforesaid.

“From the foregoing I hold that the trial court was right in holding that the doctrine of lis pendens is not applicable to this case. This appeal is grossly lacking in merit. It ought to be dismissed and it is hereby dismissed. I affirm the judgment of the lower court in suit No: FHC/IB/CS/26/2020 delivered on 17/11/2020. The respondent is entitled to cost in the sum of N300, 000 payable by the first appellant,” Justice Amadi ruled.

In his contributions, Justice A. A Adumein, stated that “I had a preview of the judgment just delivered by my learned brother, Kenneth Ikechukwu Amadi, JCA; Ph.D. I agree with the reasoning and conclusions in the leading judgment and I also dismiss this appeal.

I abide by all the consequential orders made by my learned brother.”

Also, Justice Isah Bature Gafai, stated that “I have before now read the draft of the judgment delivered by my learned brother Amadi, JCA. I am in full agreement with the lucid reasonings expressed therein and the conclusion thereby reached. I adopt those reasoning as mine; by which I too find no merit in this Appeal. It is accordingly dismissed by me too. I abide by the order on cost.”