Months after his victory in court over the Kenya Revenue Authority (KRA) and DCI in a multi-billion shilling tax case that saw his Africa Spirits Ltd. plant in Thika shut down, billionaire businessman Humphrey Kariuki is locked in a new battle.
A company associated with Kariuki, Crucial Properties, faces a suit from Telposta Pension Scheme Trustees Registered – a pension scheme for workers of Telkom Kenya, with both parties claiming ownership of a prime piece of land in Nairobi.
Kariuki is a shareholder and director of Crucial Properties, alongside Rine Hart Limited (shareholder), and Nyawira Kariuki (director). According to the pension scheme, the land parcel was íllegally registered in the name of Crucial Properties in 1998. The scheme maintains that the transfer of the property and registration was íllegal and therefore null and void.
READ>Humphrey Kariuki: Blue Moon Billionaire Who Survived Ksh41B Tax Storm
Kariuki’s Crucial Properties, however, has maintained its claim to ownership of the land, noting that it had occupied it for 24 years without interruption. Citing the adverse possession rule, Crucial had filed a preliminary objection seeking to have the case thrown out.
“The plaintiff’s suit is hopelessly time-barred in accordance with the Limitation of Actions Act since it has been filed over 12 years from the period within which the Plaintiff’s accrued right of action over the suit property would be applicable,” the company argued.
Justice Oguttu Mboya, however, ruled that the plea of statutory limitation was not well grounded. The judge asserted that several other issues had been brought to the fore, including date of accrual of the occupation. Justice Mboya noted that according to the pension scheme, they only became aware of the registration by Crucial Properties in 2013.
“I have also found and established that the plaint beforehand discloses a plethora of triable issues, which can only be interrogated and investigated vide a plenary hearing,” the judge stated.
Crucial had argued that Teleposta lost any claim to ownership of the land as it failed to file any suit seeking recovery of the land within 12 years from the date of registration in 1998. Crucial’s preliminary objection was anchored on Section 7 of the Limitation of Actions Act, reiterating that a claim for land recovery cannot be instituted after the end of 12 years from the date the other party occupied the land.
NEXT READ>From Rugby Star to Best TikToker in Africa – Dennis Ombachi’s Come-Up
