by Ellen Joy Anastacio

It is a sight not commonly seen in malls. Yesterday morning, seven security guards hired by Toshin Development barricaded Opera Gallery at the second floor of Ngee Ann City to reclaim the shop.

Early Sunday morning, as the gallery's lease ended, the power supply to the gallery was cut. This rendered its alarm system and security cameras inoperable. The two are a requirement for the artworks' insurance, according to a Straits Times report.

Gallery director Stephane Le Pelletier, 42, together with an employee, spent Saturday night there to guard more than $20 million worth of art pieces.

"Just after midnight, the alarm went off because these people decided to break into my premises. I straight away saw that there was some boarding in front of the gallery, and when I stepped into the gallery, I saw that some of our pieces, paintings were already packed," Mr Le Pelletier told a local TV station.

Opera Gallery's staff was stuck in the premises since midnight with no electricity and unable to use the toilets. According to the Straits Times, they were barred from re-entry if they stepped out.

The standoff ended at noon, when the exhausted staff left the premises.

The gallery has been operating at Ngee Ann City for twelve years. Mr Le Pelletier said the gallery had been told by the management in March last year that the lease would not be renewed after January 31.

However, he claims that Toshin, a Takashimaya subsidiary that manages the mall's specialty retail stores, had said otherwise twice before, even allowing the gallery to undergo a $300,000 renovation.

In an interview with The Straits Times, Mr Le Pelletier said, "After they agreed to the renovation, I asked if they would renew the lease when it ended. They said, yes."

He also claims that Toshin had told him not to worry about a reported mall makeover because "his lease would be renewed".

In an interview with a local television network, Mr Aw Eng Hai, partner at accounting firm Grant Thornton which is acting for Toshin Development, said, "The tenant had a lease which expired on 31 January 2009. And so upon the expiry of the tenancy, the tenant did not hand over vacant possession back to the landlord. So the landlord had to effect re-entry."

Mr Aw denies that the issue arose due to non-payment of rent. In the same interview, he said, ""No, it is not that they are not paying their rent. The landlord has found a new tenant."

Lawyers from both sides are still in talks.