Ziklagsis Network Ltd, a metering company,has filed a suit at the Federal High Court Abuja, seeking an order restraining the Federal Government of Nigeria, the Federal Ministry of Power, and four others from recovering the sum of N39.1 billion meant for metering contract.
Other defendants in the suit marked FHC/ABJ/CS/576/2024, are the Minister of Power, the Debt Management Office, the Providus Bank Ltd, and De-Haryo Global Services Ltd.
Justice James Omotosho has fixed February 4, for hearing of the suit.
Ziklagsis Network Ltd, through its lawyer, Wole Olanipekun (SAN), is also seeking the sum of N1.1bn in damages and the cost of litigation against the Federal Government and the other defendants for their alleged interference with the project,which it was granted the loan to execute and repay in seven years.
Ziklagsis submitted that based on articles 3, 4,5,6,10, and 18(i), (ii), (iii), 24 and 29(ii) of the Judgement Compromise Agreement it entered with the Federal Ministry of Power on August 28, 2017,the Ministry and the Federal Government had no powers to tamper, confiscate, seize, withhold, divert, convert and appropriate the sum of N39,171,985,233.95 granted it for the supply or provision of electric meters in Nigeria.
The firm stated that the Covid-19 pandemic was the cause of its non-execution of the contract.
According to the firm,there are calculated attempts by the Federal Government and the Ministry of Power to frustrate and sabotage its efforts in the performance of the terms of the Revalidated Tripartite Agreement as modified by the Addendum No. 2, “which attempts are done in utter bad faith with the ultimate end of truncating and or divesting the plaintiff of the benefit of the project.”
Besides,the plaintiff maintained
that the defendants frustrated efforts to execute the project by refusing to release the funds despite it being awarded the contract and receiving the presidential approval on the compliance on its part.
In their joint counter affidavit,the Federal Government and the Minister of Power submitted that they acted in accordance with the agreement in respect of the contract.
Besides,the De-Haryor Global Services Ltd informed the court in it’s counter affidavit that the suit was “brought in bad faith, and the court should not lend support for the plaintiff (Ziklagsis)’s action but should rather condemn it.”
Responding through its lawyer, Marcus Abu Esq, of the Justice Advocates, De-Haryor averred that the contract was awarded to Ziklagsis to cushion the effects of the hardship faced by Nigerians in the estimated energy billing through the deployment of free pre-paid meters but the company denied Nigerians the benefit of the project.
De-Haryor added that Ziklagsis has not placed anything on the ground in the court to demonstrate what it has done pursuant to its Exhibit ZNL 5 agreement while De-Haryor, on the other hand, has substantially executed the contract it has with it.
“By the provision of Article 5(d) of the JCA, the plaintiff (Ziklagsis) was given two years of moratorium within which to supply or provide electric meters in Nigeria according to the JCA,” De-Haryor’s lawyer submitted.
“Meanwhile, the plaintiff (Ziklagsis) did not invest any funds in the performance of same but the 1st and 3rd defendants (Federal Government and Minister of Power) had already given the sum of over N39 billion to the plaintiff for the execution of the metering project. Rather than perform its obligation under the contract, the plaintiff deposited the said sum in a fixed deposit.”
“My lord, the mere fact that the 1st and 3rd defendants (Federal Government and Minister of Power) had already paid the contract sum to the plaintiff (Ziklagsis) showed that the defendants have performed their obligations under the said contract. On the other hand, the plaintiff depositing the contract sum in a fixed deposit account is a clear indication that it had no intention to utilise the contract sum for the project intended by the JCA. Rather than declaring estoppel against the defendants as prayed in relief 1, the court should declare that the contract is already discharged by the plaintiff’s breach.”
Questioning why the plaintiff’s metering service agreement it executed with the Yola Disco and received the letter of drawdown from the 2nd defendant (Ministry of Power) without supplying a single meter towards the project, he asked “Is the world still being ravaged with Covid-19 pandemic till the time of filing this suit? It is common knowledge that Covid-19 did not last the whole of the year 2020.”
De-Haryor joined the suit as an interested party after delivering on phase one of the barracks metering project for the Nigerian Army under the Ministries, Departments and Agencies (MDAs) metering project. The army had introduced it to the Ziklagsis to receive a loan of N7.5bn of the N39bn granted to the company.
Similarly, the 5th Defendant (Providus Bank), through its lawyer, Adesegun Ajibola (SAN), stated that parts of Ziklagsis’ affidavit depositions are false and full of half-truths to mislead the court, adding that the company being only a fixed deposit account customer seeking higher interest on the deposit than offered by Polaris Bank, Providus is not aware of the terms of the agreement it reached with the Federal Government.
Susinya Joseph Bulus, Regional Legal Officer of Providus bank stated that “I have seen and read the Plaintiff’s affidavit in support of the Originating Summons dated 29th April, 2024 and I know as a fact that a number of the averments contained therein are false and half truths and deliberate misstatements aimed at misleading this Honourable Court.
While “vehemently and specifically” denying the depositions of the Plaintiff, Bulus averred that “the 5th Defendant, is not privy to the terms of the agreement between the Applicant and 24 Defendant as it was only made aware by the Applicant that it was in search of a more profitable bank to invest the sum it
received from the Federal Ministry of Power, as it did not believe the interest payment on the principal sum invested from Polaris Bank Ltd was sufficient or adequate for the amount of money invested.
“That after due consideration and much plea from Applicant, the 5th Defendant agreed to accept the lodgment of N39,171,985,233.95 and on the directive of the Plaintiff issued a payment guarantee to the Federal Ministry of Power with ref number: BG/LEG/HQ/220/0001B dated February 2020.
“That the 5th Defendant is not a party to the contract between the Plaintiff and the 2nd Respondent, its only relationship with the Plaintiff is simply of a bank and customer with a fixed deposit account.
“In September 2023, the Plaintiff, Nigerian Army, and De-Haryor Global Services Limited entered into a power metering consortium agreement, and part of the agreement require that a portion of the funds received by the bank on behalf of the Plaintiff, is to be allocated and released to De-Haryor Global Services Limited to fund the first phase of the Nigerian Army Power Metering Project across 8 barracks in six locations.
“That the agreement was accepted by the plaintiff and ratified by the 2nd Respondent, who then issued a letter of partial discharge to the 5th Defendant with respect to the initial sum of N39,171,985,233.95.
