JUDGE STOPS BUILDING OF FREEDOM FIGHTER’S HOUSE.

0
2820
Dipa Pulling (daughter) and Sandeep Rajini Desai (grandson) leaving Milimani law court on Tuesday March 28 ,2017.
BY SAM ALFAN.
The high court has stopped the construction of a house belonging to a freedom fighter JM’s grandson.
It barred Suchan Investment from interfering, constructing the house belonging to Freedom fighter JM Desai’s grandson Sandeep.
“Pending hearing and determination of this suit or further orders by the court , the 1 respondent is restrained from demolishing building or structures on LR NO. 209/1916/6 (suit property) and from in any way interfering with 2 defendant’s possession and enjoyment of the potion of the suit property in the possession of 2 defendant as of this date” ordered the learned judge.
Judge Samson Okongo ruled that Suchan Investment should not carry out any or further construction or development of any nature in the said property.
The court further ruled that the rent if any collected from the suit should be deposited in an interest earning joint bank account in the names of the advocate on records for Suchan Investments Limited and Sandeep Rajni Desai.
“All rent if any being collected from the suit property shall with the effect from 1 April 2017 be deposited in an interest earnings joint bank account in the names of the advocates on record for the plaintiff and defendant” ruled judge.
“Solving of land disputes through the use of hired bunch of hooligans has no place in Kenya today. This trend which is gaining root must stop,”judge ruled.
The orders granted shall last for a period of eight months only from the date hereof within which the parties must prepare and set down this old case for hearing and final determination.
The house is located at the backyard of the Desai House in Parklands, Nairobi and was once gazetted as a national monument .
In the case Suchan Investments argued that they bought inheritance shares and claimed that the gazettement is a ploy to deny some beneficiaries their rightful share.
Suchan Investment further contended that Sandeep Ranji Desai has all along treated the said property as his own.
The company also argues that the decision to have the said suit declared a National Monument by the Ministry of National Heritage and Culture was quashed by the court of appeal.
On his part Dipa Pulling argued that the Suchan Investmnet Limited entered the suit property through its agents without a court orders on the 18th of March last year and damaged the buildings .
The court further was told that between 18th March 2016 and 20 March Suchan Investments Limited director Kamal Shah accompanied by a group of 30 armed men with crude weapons broke padlocks to access the suit property.
The court found that Suchan Investment Limited entered the said property forceful.
The court ruled that There’s is no evidence that the suit property has been formally portioned among the registered owner.
“I do not think it was open to Suchan Limited to unilaterally excise a portion of the suit property for itself,”court heard.
Jashbhai Mutibhai  Desai left a will dated 29th March 1991  indicating that that his property in Parklands be inherited by two of his children and two grandchildren, and that the four would have equal shares.
“Until the acquisition by the Suchan Investments Limited of  Kevit Subash Desai  and Niranjan Jashbhai Desai  50 per cent  share in the suit property  is declared illegal ,null and void, the company  remains owner of the said shares and is entitled to enjoy rights associated  with such ownership provided the right of Dipa pulling and Sandeep Desai is respected,” ruled the Judge.
Trouble started in 2008 when the building and the 1.7 acres it stands on were gazetted as a national monument.
Two of the beneficiaries —Niranjan Jashbai Desai) and Kevit Shubash Desai sold their shares to Suchan Investments.

Dipa Pulling (daughter) and Sandeep Rajini Desai (grandson) are still holding on to the property.

“The orders granted herein shall last for a period on eight (8) months only from the date hereof with in which the parties must be prepared and set dawn this old case for hearing and final determination” rule judge.

LEAVE A REPLY