There is no uncertainty in the affairs of the Daily Times of Nigeria PLC in relation to its shareholders, share capital, directors, chairman and secretary, a Federal High Court sitting in Abuja has ruled.
The company has run into series of troubled waters since its privatisation by the federal government, and it has sued 3 Dom limited and Corporate Affairs Commission after 3Dom wrote to disqualify Daily Times of Nigeria PLC from participating in the publication of “Nigeria’s Political History” on the ground of uncertainty in status and affairs of the company.
Daily Times of Nigeria Plc also lodged a complaint against 3Dom’s disqualification after it fulfilled all bidding requirements for the contract “because of conflicting reports in the newspapers on the status and affairs of the plaintiff, indicating that there is uncertainty in the state of affairs of the plaintiff relating to its shareholders, share capital, directors, chairman and secretary.”
Delivering judgment on the suit on Thursday, Justice Aliyu R. Mohammed held that there was merit in the suit, and therefore granted the seven declarations sought, to the effect that the current directors of The Daily Times of Nigeria PLc, the plaintiff to the exclusion of all others, are: Ikechukwu Obiorah, Chinedu Oranuba, Adetokunbo kayode, Umar Na’Abba Ghali, Chudi Ofodile, Chukwudi Joseph Okeke, Muniru Abiola, Emeka Mbonu, Zakariyau Usman Mohammed and Rashide Adepoju.
The court also held that Senator Ikechukwu Obiorah is the Chairman of Daily Times of Nigeria PLc while the secretary to the company is Mr. Linus Agi Idu. It declared that the current shareholders of Daily Times of Nigeria PLc and the shares held are as follows: Arkngel Global limited, 70,126,045 shares; Bontez Corporate And Allied Services Limited, 70,126,045 shares; DSV Limited, 93,501,936 shares; Sundry Shareholders, 9,600 shares; Independence Day Publication Limited, 1,542,643,161shares; and Wiparquet Limited, 1,542,643,161shares.
Justices Mohammed the judgement was based on painstakingly evaluation of the processes filed in court.
“I hold that the plaintiff is an ongoing concern, the first defendant has admitted that he disqualified the plaintiff from the bidding,” he said.
“It is, however, strange that the first defendant did not deem it fit to explain; his action is rash and completely unreasonable. CAC has stated categorically that there is no uncertainty in the state of affairs of the plaintiff. I, therefore, grant all reliefs sought by the plaintiff.”
