Wale Igbintade
Nigerian-American property investor and owner of Kings County Property Investment Limited, Alhaji Hameed Kasumu, has denied allegations portraying him as a land grabber, insisting that a Lagos High Court had affirmed his company’s ownership of the disputed Ikoyi property long before the criminal proceedings now pending against him.
Kasumu was reacting to a media report titled “Arraignment of Alleged Land Grabber, Firm Stalled in Lagos,” which stated that his arraignment over alleged forcible entry and unlawful possession of a parcel of land in Ikoyi was stalled because of his absence in court.
Speaking in Lagos, Kasumu criticised the report as one-sided, accusing it of ignoring existing court judgments in his favour and failing to seek his response before publication.
He said the omission was inconsistent with the ethics of journalism and the principle of fair hearing.
According to him, the petition that gave rise to the criminal charge ought not to have been entertained by the police because ownership of the land had already been conclusively determined by a court of competent jurisdiction.
Kasumu maintained that the petitioner, Muhammadu Wada, was fully aware that Kings County Property Investment Limited had secured a judgment affirming its title to the property.
He urged the media to exercise caution in reporting matters already before the courts, stressing the need for balanced coverage to avoid causing reputational damage to parties involved in legal disputes.
Describing himself as a reputable businessman, community leader, Muslim leader and philanthropist, Kasumu said his contributions span real estate development, education and humanitarian causes.
He insisted he had nothing to hide regarding his business activities and expressed confidence that the facts would ultimately vindicate him.
The media report had stated that the Inspector-General of Police filed a five-count charge against Kasumu and Kings County Property Investment Limited before the Lagos State High Court sitting at Tafawa Balewa Square in Suit No. LD/26902C/2025.
The charges stemmed from a petition by Muhammadu Wada, who alleged that the defendants unlawfully occupied his property at Plot 15, Alexander Avenue, Ikoyi, Lagos.
At the resumed hearing before Justice Abdul-Raheem Muyideen, the prosecutor, Igile Oju, told the court that the defendants had been duly served with the charge but failed to appear for arraignment.
He maintained that proof of service was before the court and that the defendants were aware of the proceedings.
Counsel to the defendants, Ebun-Olu Adegboruwa (SAN), however, disputed the prosecution’s position, arguing that the first defendant was outside the court’s jurisdiction and had not been properly served.
Adegboruwa further informed the court that he had filed a preliminary objection challenging the court’s jurisdiction to entertain the charge.
According to the senior advocate, the dispute concerns land already allocated to Kings County Property Investment Limited and whose ownership had been conclusively determined in earlier proceedings.
He argued that where jurisdiction is being challenged, the physical presence of the first defendant is not required until the objection is determined.
Kasumu also relied on a judgment delivered on July 10, 2024, by Justice O.O. Ogunjobi of the Lagos State High Court in Suit No. LD/8305LMW/2019 between Kings County Property Investment Limited and the Governor of Lagos State, the Lagos State Government and the Attorney-General of Lagos State.
According to him, the judgment conclusively affirmed his company’s ownership of the disputed property before the institution of the criminal proceedings.
In the judgment, Justice Ogunjobi resolved the principal issues in favour of Kings County Property Investment Limited, holding that the company’s evidence of uninterrupted possession of the property since acquiring it in 2018 was unchallenged.
The court accepted the company’s evidence that Lagos State Government officials, accompanied by armed policemen, invaded the property on July 11, 2019, chased away security personnel and construction workers, and sealed a cancer treatment centre under construction on the land.
Justice Ogunjobi also accepted evidence that the company had invested billions of naira in the project and suffered substantial financial losses following the disruption.
The judge held that the defendants failed to specifically deny those allegations, making the evidence uncontroverted and sufficient to justify the declaratory reliefs sought.
The court further ruled that the Lagos State Government could not lawfully revoke the claimant’s Certificate of Occupancy after the commencement of the suit.
Although the court declined to declare the cancer treatment centre a public-purpose project, it granted perpetual injunctions restraining interference with the property and made consequential orders protecting the company’s possession.
The court, however, refused the claim for special and aggravated damages for lack of specific pleading and proof, but awarded N50 million in general damages after finding that the defendants failed to contradict evidence of forcible entry with armed policemen.
It also awarded N5 million in costs against the defendants.
Kasumu maintained that the subsisting judgment vindicates his company’s ownership of the property and should be considered in evaluating the allegations against him.
He expressed confidence that the pending criminal proceedings would be resolved in accordance with the law and reaffirmed his commitment to lawful business practices and investments in Nigeria.
