The construction of phase 3 of the multibillion-shillings housing estate Four Ways junction has been stopped by the court.
This is after a party to the deal moved to the High Court claiming breach of an agreement. Njehu Gatabaki accuses Suraya Property among other parties of charging the disputed land, in breach of an agreement.
Justice Olga Sewe stopped any planned sale or advertisement of the property or the construction of phase III of the project, pending the hearing of the case.
Gatabaki and Muga Developers Limited, through lawyer Omwanza Ombati, told the court there is ongoing arbitration proceedings which ought to be guarded before any construction works can continue.
He said Suraya has completed two phases of the development and is undertaking Phase III, which he believes is the last phase of the project.
Construction of Phase III started on July 28, 2016. Four Ways Junction were completely sold in the first few months of ground breaking, he says.
“It is important that an interim measure of protection is given the behaviour of the respondents by way of counterclaim to safeguard the integrity of the arbitration process and forestall the likelihood of obtaining a paper decree for purposes of enforcement,” Njehu Gatabaki says in a sworn statement.
He said parties in dispute had agreed to stop the case before the court and pursue alternative dispute resolution, which they settled for an arbitrator. Parties have participated in preliminaries of the arbitration proceedings only Suraya Property Group to pull out.
Ombati said Soraya has breached the agreement entered on April 2, 1996, by charging the suit land without involvement of the directors of Muga Developers. In the deal, Muga Developer was only to provide land, while Suraya was to carry out the construction of the houses and source for funding.
Five of the 20 acres were to be reverted to Gatabaki in addition to 16 Lillac Villas among other benefits. The disputing parties had appointed Kylo Mbobu as an arbitrator.
The lawyer said Suraya has been “uncooperative and has insinuated that it will not participate in the arbitration proceedings” despite having agreed to it and participated in the appointment of the arbitrator.
He says he has on various dates sought to peruse the court file but the court file cannot traced. The judge directed the parties to file submissions and exchange before the hearing.