For allegedly refusing to refund a contract sum after a failed contract, a firm, Satek Nigeria Limited, has instituted a suit against a new generation bank before a Lagos High Court sitting in Osborne, Ikoyi.

Apart from the bank, joined as the second defendant in the suit marked LD/ADR/4527/22, is Technova Industries Limited.

Satek Nigeria Limited and its Chief Executive Officer (CEO), Mr. Samson Babajide, in their amended statement of claim, filed by their counsel, Mr Adekunle Adegbite, alleged breach of contract by the defendant.

Babajide stated that they had a contractual agreement with the first defendant for payment guarantee as security to complete the contract of importing deep chillers.

According to him, the first defendant asked that the claimants deposit the sum of N14.3 million, which was done on July 13, 2017.

The claimants later made a demand on the said deposit in a letter dated June 10, 2021.

They added that a dispute arose with the second defendant as the condition precedent for being paid the guarantee was not fulfilled, leading to the claimants suing both defendants at the High Court of Lagos when the first defendant wanted to release the money on the payment guarantee to the second defendant.

The claimants further swore: “The claimants aver that though it sued both defendants, the case was struck out on technical grounds by the Court on December 17, 2017 on the ground that the pre-action form was not served on the defendants, leading to the claimants to eventually concede that the matter be struck out.

But the Bank according to them claimed the deposited sum cannot be returned to the claimants unless there is a valid court judgment to that effect and their obligation to the second defendant is discharged since there is no way a letter of performance can be obtained from the second defendant as it did not fulfill the condition precedent for the payment guarantee.

The claimants, therefore, asked the court for “a declaration that since the second defendant had failed to perform its obligation to the claimants for which the payment of the guarantee was set up, the first defendant is discharged from its obligation to make payment to the second defendant.”

They asked for N14.3 million refund, 10 per cent interest yearly from July 2017 and a cost of N1.7 million.

In its amended statement of defence by Mudashiru Aihari, the bank urged the court to dismiss the claimants’ suit with substantial cost, for being frivolous, abuse of the judicial process and gold-digging.

The bank argued that the Payment Guarantee issued by the defendant on December 8, 2016 was valid for 180 days from the date of issuance and for the sum of N14.3 million, and the Guarantee was solely in favour of Technovaa Industries Limited.

It added that same became null and void at the expiration of the tenor whether or not it was returned to the defendant for cancellation.

The bank denied most of the averrements and countered them, urging the court to dismiss the suit.

Culled From The Guardian