The Imperial Bank head office on Westlands Road in Nairobi. PHOTO | FILE
In Summary
- The Doshis argue that the court has jurisdiction to intervene before or after an institution is placed under receivership and deal with any question arising.
- “We are afraid the CBK is running another parallel bank under Kenya Deposit Insurance Corporation and is mixing our money with others at a very big risk to us,” said Mr Doshi.
- The regulator said it had met depositors of the collapsed bank to discuss various outstanding issues though it is not clear whether the meetings included customers such as Mr Doshi.
Mombasa-based billionaire Ashok Doshi, who has more
than Sh1 billion locked in collapsed Imperial Bank, has sued the Central
Bank of Kenya (CBK), seeking to stop the use of rival banks to pay
the collapsed bank’s small depositors.
Mr Doshi and his wife, Amit, also want the court to order
the defendants to deposit the Sh1 billion they claim to be locked up at
Imperial Bank in an escrow account in the names of their advocates.
The Doshis are associated with the Doshi Group, a
company with interests in manufacturing and trading, including the sale
of building materials and power cables. Founded in 1923 in Mombasa, the
Doshi Group has grown organically and through acquisitions to become one
of Kenya’s biggest manufacturing firms.
Through their lawyer, Francis Kadima, the Doshi
couple is seeking orders restraining the CBK and Imperial Bank from
continuing to deal in their (couple’s) money in whatever manner — either
by investing, transferring to other banks or to the Kenya Insurance
Deposit Corporation.
They are also seeking orders directing the
defendants to file Imperial Bank’s statement of account showing
liquidity in the deposit account, audit statement published and
approved for 2014/2015 and any other liquid and tangible securities held
by CBK as of October 13 last year.
The application by the couple is based on grounds
that they held both dollar and shilling accounts with Imperial Bank,
which went into receivership in October last year.
The Doshis argue that the court has jurisdiction to
intervene before or after an institution is placed under receivership
and deal with any question arising.
“The defendants are liable to pay both insured
amounts and protected deposits once an institution is put under
receivership,” the Doshis argue in suit papers.
The couple further argues that deposits held by
Imperial at the time it was put under receivership were sufficient to
pay all depositors. The plaintiffs reckon that the CBK’s intervention
was not because of insolvency but discovery of a fraudulent scheme
described as a “parallel bank” that had existed over a period of time.
The plaintiffs further claim that the defendants’
chosen method of paying depositors is illegal, in breach of the law and
ought to be stopped until the findings of a forensic report by FTI
Consulting LLP London and the CBK’s own investigations are filed in
court.
“The plaintiffs have a legitimate claim and the
same ought to be heard urgently to avoid any further hardship that may
result into total loss of their money,” said Mr Kadima.
Parallel bank
In their supporting affidavit, the Doshis said they
learnt through a press release that Imperial Bank had been put in
receivership.
No comments :
Post a Comment