Justice Akintayo Aluko of a Federal High Court in Lagos has granted an interim order to freeze the bank accounts of Plural Oil Marketing Limited and two of its directors due to an alleged debt of N3.17 billion and $835,486.76 owed to Providus Bank Limited. This order was issued on October 7, 2025.

The order came about after Providus Bank submitted an ex parte application through its lawyer, Mr. Mitchel Aribisala. The bank requested the court to protect funds associated with the defendants until a substantive motion could be decided.

The defendants listed in the case identified by FHC/L/CS/2015/2025 include Plural Oil Marketing Limited, Mr. Babatunde Oyefolu, and Ms. Oluwatobiloba Oyefolu. The alleged debt reportedly originated from credit facilities provided to Plural Oil for importing Base Oil used in lubricant manufacturing, with the bank claiming continuous defaults despite multiple restructurings between 2021 and 2023, as detailed in an affidavit by Ms. Arith Esin, a Recovery and Remedial Officer at Providus Bank.

Justice Aluko instructed 30 commercial and merchant banks to freeze all accounts belonging to or associated with the defendants up to the amount of the alleged debt. The court further mandated the banks to impose a lien or a post-no-debit restriction on any accounts held by the defendants, regardless of direct or indirect ownership, until the bank's motion on notice could be heard.

Additionally, digital payment platforms and settlement systems, including NIBSS, Interswitch, Opay, MoMo PSB, Unified Payments, Hydrogen Payments, and Hope PSB, were also restricted from processing any debit instructions on the accounts until further notice.

Justice Aluko also ordered all responding banks to submit an affidavit of return within a week, outlining all accounts linked to the BVNs, their balances, and a six-month transaction history.

The court allowed Providus Bank to deliver court documents to Babatunde and Oyefolu using substituted service by posting at their last known address in Ikoyi, Lagos. However, the request to serve Plural Oil Marketing Limited in a similar manner was denied on the grounds that a corporate entity cannot be served in such a way.

In the meantime, Plural Oil Marketing Limited and its director, Oyefolu, have submitted a motion to the court requesting the freezing order to be overturned. Their application, filed by Dr. Sulaiman Usman, SAN, characterized the order as oppressive, unconstitutional, and in violation of their rights.

In their plea to have the order lifted, the defendants asserted that the order was issued before the originating documents were served, noting that the same order allowed for substituted service—indicating that valid service had not occurred. In a 27-paragraph affidavit submitted by Mr. Oyefolu, the applicants stated they learned of the order on October 9, 2025, when their banks informed them of the instructions received from the plaintiff’s counsel.

The applicants referred to the order as a “blanket” directive freezing the accounts of third parties uninvolved in the lawsuit, arguing that it amounted to judicial overreach and infringing on their rights under Sections 36 and 44 of the 1999 Constitution. They contended that Providus Bank did not provide sufficient evidence linking the frozen funds to the alleged debt or demonstrating any risk of asset dissipation. The motion to dissolve the order is anticipated to be addressed at the following adjourned hearing.