IPP Executive Chairman Dr. Reginald Mengi
IPP
Executive Chairman Dr Reginald Mengi has disowned connections with KM
Prospecting Limited, a company alleged to have defied the High Court’s
Commercial Division judgment, saying he was neither a shareholder nor a
director.
A
widely-circulated media report last week had it that the High Court,
summoned the philanthropist to explain why he should not be committed to
prison for failure to satisfy a decree for 598,750 US dollars (about
1.2bn/-) payments.
It
is alleged that such payments are in favour of three businessmen,
Muganyizi Lutagwaba, Eric Mshauri and Charles Mgweo, as decree holders,
following a dispute relating to purchase of shares, which was resolved
by the court against Dr Mengi and K.M.
Prospecting
Limited, currently judgment debtors. But according to a press statement
availed yesterday, Dr Mengi’s advocate, Mr Deogratias Ringia, said his
client is not a principal party in the case -- but KM Prospecting
Limited.
Mr
Ringia went on to explain that KM Prospecting Limited entered into the
agreement with the plaintiffs. “This agreement is the subject matter of
the case. Dr Mengi is not a shareholder or director in that company and
was not a party to the agreement,” read part of the statement.
He
said the judgment read by the Registrar of the High Court on January
28, this year, “my clients were not satisfied with the judgment thus, on
February 1, 2016 we wrote a letter to the High Court requesting them to
supply us with a copy of the judgment.”
“When
we received a copy of the judgment, we discovered that the judgment had
no date. In law, a judgment that is not dated is not a judgment at all.
In other words it is invalid and it cannot be appealed against and the
other side cannot execute such a judgment,” he said.
Mr
Ringia identified that later on February 19, they wrote another letter
requesting that the judgment be placed before the judge who wrote it so
that the error could be corrected.
Unfortunately,
he said we were not supplied with a dated judgment. He said they
decided again to send another written reminder on March 10 and made many
physical follow-up to the court but no avail.
The
advocate maintained that in any case in the undated judgment, the High
Court decided that there was no evidence to substantiate the two
allegations which the plaintiffs advanced against Dr Mengi.
Download Video and Put Comment
Toa Maoni Hapa Chini
