Economy

CBK bid to quash Sh1bn depositor’s evidence flops

ashok

Lawyer Francis Kadima for Mr Ashok Doshi. PHOTO | LABAN WALLOGA

The Central Bank of Kenya (CBK) suffered a setback after its application seeking to strike out evidence filed by businessman Ashok Doshi who has sued it together with Imperial Bank (under receivership) was dismissed.

Mr Doshi a Mombasa tycoon and his wife Amit Doshi want to be paid their Sh1 billion deposits held by Imperial.

Justice Patrick Otieno, sitting at the High Court in Mombasa, dismissed the CBK application saying it was not in the interests of justice. Justice Otieno, who termed the application as lacking merit, added that it was a disruptive manoeuvre that could be avoided.

“My views remain that case conference cannot be done through an application as sought by the defendants but must remain an interactive and consensus building session with the court taking charge as the driver of process,” said Justice Otieno.

In its application, CBK said that the pleadings contained in the Doshi’s court documents not only amount to mere allegations whose veracity is yet to be tested, but also no witness shall be called to testify regarding them.

Through lawyer Paul Chege, the CBK also argued that the pleadings offend the provisions of the Evidence Act as they irregularly seek to introduce prejudicial material to circumvent the requirements of the law.

“CBK shall be severely prejudiced by the affidavits and witness statements as it shall not have an opportunity to cross examine the makers under oath,” read the application.

The banking regulator wanted the tycoon’s pleadings struck out and expunged from court records.

Mr Chege argued that the pleadings belong to other cases before other courts.

He further argued that the businessman cannot give evidence on documents filed by other people in other cases.

Through lawyers Francis Kadima and Willis Oluga, the businessman told the court that it is not for CBK to dictate to him which documents to rely on in support of his case and how to conduct it. He further told the court that CBK had not shown what prejudices it will suffer and that it had a window to counter the documents which it did not utilise.