Veteran entertainer Uche Ibeto, popularly known as The Jigida Queen, has petitioned the Chief Justice of Nigeria and the National Judicial Council (NJC), alleging that she was forcefully and unlawfully removed from her family home in Lagos on the basis of what she describes as a “fraudulent” court judgment.

The judgment in question—delivered on July 10, 2025, in Suit No. LD/9481GCM/2025—awarded possession of the property to Mr. Cecil Osakwe, who told the court he purchased the house from two of Ibeto’s elder sisters, Mrs. Laura Okoh and Mrs. Ifeoma Ilodibe.

Entertainer Says Execution Left Her Homeless

Speaking to journalists in Lagos, the 70-year-old entertainer said the home, inherited from their late mother, Mrs. Esther Ibeto, has long been a source of internal family disputes. She maintained that the judgment’s execution on August 15, 2025, rendered her homeless and claimed that neither she nor her sister was properly served with court processes.

“At my age, I should be resting. Instead, I was thrown out of my home,” she said, adding that her sister, Ifeoma—who resides abroad—“never participated” in the proceedings.

Ibeto also alleged that a man identified only as Chiedu was hired to impersonate her sister during the case. She linked the dispute to a lawyer and client currently facing trial in Abuja over unrelated alleged land-grabbing cases, though she provided no documentary evidence tying them to her own matter.

Claims of Impersonation and Wrongful Documentation

She further alleged that the title document relied upon in court—No. 28, Page 28, Volume 1994E—does not pertain to the Surulere property in dispute but to an entirely different property in Idimu, Alimosho Local Government Area, belonging to a man named Leonard Mbanefo Zeku.

“The court was misled with falsified documents and impersonation. The judgment was obtained without the involvement of the real owners or the tenants,” she claimed.

Her legal team filed applications on September 22, 2025, asking the court to set aside the judgment on grounds of non-service.

Buyer’s Lawyer Denies All Allegations

In a phone interview, the lawyer representing the buyer dismissed Ibeto’s allegations, insisting that the judgment was both legitimate and consensual.

According to him, the decision was a consent judgment based on an agreement signed by the parties, which stipulated that possession could be taken after three months if it had not already been handed over.

“The buyer paid in January 2025. The proceedings in June were simply to enforce possession. It was not contentious,” he said.