A better free encumbrance turned to bitter land dispute has erupted in Oshimili North, pitting the Ogbe-Ozoma Community against neighbouring Issele-Azagba over a high-profile property acquired by the Cubana Group.
At a tense press briefing in Asaba, counsel to Ogbe-Ozoma, Chief Ifeanyi Ejiofor, dismissed claims circulating in a viral video suggesting the community unlawfully sold land belonging to Issele-Azagba.
He maintained that the property was lawfully sold to Cubana Group in 2019, with the title properly transferred under applicable laws.
Ejiofor described assertions tying the land to a consent judgment in favour of Issele-Azagba as “mischievous,” warning that the narrative is intended to inflame public opinion.
“The land upon which Cubana Group is currently undertaking development forms part of the ancestral inheritance of the Ogbe-Ozoma Community. It has never been the subject of any dispute or litigation,” he said.
Related News
Govt of development in Oboghoro in Warri’s Benin River (2)
ATOPCON harps on proactive urban planning to tackle illegal development
Nigeria’s economic development hinges on empowering SMEs, says Ganduje
Ejiofor stressed that the briefing was necessary to counter the rapid spread of unverified social media claims. He added that his firm has represented the community for over five years and is fully familiar with the land’s legal history.
He maintained that the property is free from encumbrance, lien, or adverse claim, and warned that attempts to connect it to unrelated litigation are defamatory and capable of causing serious confusion.
Escalating tensions, Ogbe-Ozoma spokesperson Chief Felix Okafor argued that Okpanam has no legitimate land dispute with Issele-Azagba, claiming the latter historically occupied the area only as tenant farmers.
He explained that ancestors of Okpanam granted Issele-Azagba settlement rights strictly for agricultural purposes.
“It is very funny seeing them dragging our land with us,” he said bluntly.
However, counsel to the Issele-Azagba community, Larry Oliseh, directly contradicted that position, insisting the same parcel currently under development falls within a consent judgment already entered in favour of his clients.
In this article