The Legal Practitioners Disciplinary Committee, LPDC, has adjourned until July 29 the hearing of a petition alleging professional misconduct against Mr Ikechukwu Ezechukwu, Senior Advocate of Nigeria, and two other lawyers.
The adjournment followed the committee’s rejection of an application by Mr D. O. Okolo, counsel to Ezechukwu seeking the dismissal of the petition on the grounds that Mr Kingsley Aneubuna, who filed the petition had indicated an intention to withdraw it.
Okolo argued that the petitioner, had decided to withdraw the matter and was aware of the proceedings but failed to appear before the panel.
Documents made available to the News Agency of Nigeria showed that Aneubuna had filed the petition against Ezechukwu, Smart Ukpanah and Hope Onyekwere over alleged professional misconduct.
The petition accused the trio of professional misconduct, criminal misrepresentation, forgery and perjury.
At the sitting of the committee, chaired by Mr Kalu Umeh, Okolo, urged the panel to dismiss the petition.
“The petitioner forwarded a letter notifying the committee of his intention to withdraw the petition, the petitioner is very much aware of the proceedings but is not before the panel,” he said.
But the chairman rejected the application, stating that the committee’s rules did not permit the withdrawal of petitions once issues had been joined.
“Since issues have been joined, we are obligated by the rules of this committee to adopt the processes filed by the petitioner,” Umeh said.
The panel subsequently adjourned the matter until July 29, for definite hearing.
Also Read: NBA slams judicial interference in party affairs
NAN reports that the petition arose from a disputed property transaction involving Ngozika Nwaneri, Uche Okoli and Multi Shelters Limited.
The dispute is connected to Suit No. FCT/HC/CV/1182/2018 concerning Plot No. 713, Cadastral Zone B14, Dutse District, Abuja.
According to the petition, the petitioner was offered a terrace duplex on the disputed land in 2018 by Okoli and Multi Shelters Ltd for N51 million.
Before making payment, the petitioner and her lawyer allegedly sought clarification from Ezechukwu on the status of the property and were assured that it had a clean and unencumbered title.
The petition stated that relying on those assurances, the petitioner accepted the offer, made the required payments and executed an agreement for the transaction.
The petition stated that the house was expected to be completed within two years, during which the petitioner was to complete all payments.
The petitioner said she later observed a slow pace of work and sought an explanation but was allegedly assured that the property would still be delivered within the agreed timeline.
In 2021, the petitioner allegedly discovered that the property was already the subject of litigation in Suit No. FCT/HC/CV/1182/2018, filed in March 2018.
The petition further alleged that Justice Hussein Yusuf granted an injunction in the matter in 2018.
The petitioner also alleged that she was joined as a co-claimant in the suit without her knowledge or consent by Ukpanah, who allegedly filed court processes and represented her and other subscribers without authorisation.
It was further alleged that Onyekwere testified in court on behalf of the petitioner and others without their knowledge or authorisation.
The petition also accused Ezechukwu of presenting a forged version of the agreement between his clients and the petitioner, alleging that the document bore a forged signature and was backdated to 2012 instead of 2018, when the genuine agreement was executed.
The petitioner maintained that both the forged and genuine agreements were prepared by Ezechukwu, who allegedly knew that litigation over the property was already pending in 2018 when the property was sold.
The petition further alleged that the petitioner paid for the property based on fraudulent misrepresentations by Ezechukwu and his clients.
The petitioner later engaged another lawyer to have her name struck out of the suit and subsequently filed Petition No. BB/LPDC/760/2022 against the respondents.
The petitioner urged the LPDC to investigate the respondents, all of whom are legal practitioners called to the Nigerian Bar, for alleged misconduct.
NAN
