Ondo FA chairman asks court to stop Mobil from evicting him
By Boye Oyeyemi
The Chairman of the Ondo State Football Association, Otunba Sunday Dele-Ajayi, has approached the Ondo State High Court to stop Mobil PLC from evicting him from a filling station he operates in Akure, the state capital.
Dele-Ajayi, a former regent of Akure, filed the suit through his lawyer, Olusola Oke, seeking an injunction restraining the oil company and its representatives from terminating their existing agreement or taking possession of the property pending the determination of the case.
The legal action followed two eviction notices dated September 25 and October 5, 2026. The claimant alleged that the notices violated Clause 18.3 of the agreement and operating manual governing the business arrangement.
In a motion on notice filed in suit number HCAK/447/CIV/2026, Dele-Ajayi urged the court to restrain Mobil from ejecting him or taking any action that could undermine the proceedings before the dispute is resolved.
In a related development, Oke wrote to Mobil on October 16, urging the company to suspend any move to terminate the agreement or remove his client from the premises while the matter remained before the court.
The claimant’s legal team argued that the validity and implications of the eviction notices were matters for judicial determination. It maintained that the company should refrain from taking unilateral action that could affect the subject of the dispute before the court rules on the matter.
To support its position, the legal team cited the Supreme Court’s decision in Military Governor of Lagos State v. Ojukwu (1986), which established the principle against self-help in disputes subject to judicial proceedings. It also referred to Kotoye v. Central Bank of Nigeria (1989), a case addressing the principles governing interlocutory injunctions.
Dele-Ajayi urged Mobil to maintain the existing position until the court determines the dispute, warning that any action capable of frustrating the proceedings could attract further legal consequences. The court’s determination of the application will establish whether the requested interim protection should be granted.
