Bank of Uganda files an appeal against sudhir
Bank of Uganda appeals against Sudhir’s monday ruling. File Photo

Bank of Uganda files an appeal against Tycoon Sudhir Ruparelia’s win over the multi-million commercial case filed by Crane Bank-in-receivership

Bank of Uganda has filed an appeal against David Wangutusi, the Commercial Court head ruling in which he dismissed a multi-million commercial case filed by Crane Bank-in-Receivership two years back against a City Tycoon, Sudhir Ruparelia.

Charity Mugumya, Director Communications Bank of Uganda (BoU) in a press release sent out said that BoU wants the 397bn shillings dismissed the case, by Commercial Court prosecuted again and get to its logical conclusions.

“While Hon. Justice David Wangutusi dismissed the Shs397bn case against Mr Sudhir on technicality, alleging that Crane Bank-in-receivership lost its powers to ‘sue’ or to be ‘sued’ thus rendering its suit a nullity, Crane Bank in receivership maintains that receivership is a management situation and hence no legal change as capacity to sue or to be sued,” BoU of Uganda statement reads in part.

“Bank of Uganda would like to reassure the public that it is committed to pursuing this matter to its logical conclusion,” BoU further added.

Also, BoU said they as well served the notice of appeal to Sudhir’s lawyers of Kampala Associated Advocates (KAA), to make them aware of BoU’s next move.

“Crane Bank-in-receivership is dissatisfied with the decision of the Hon. Justice Wangutusi and has served a copy of the notice of appeal to Kampala Associated Advocates, the legal representatives of Mr Sudhir Ruparelia and Meera Investments Ltd.”

Justice Wangutusi in the Monday ruling in which he dismissed the Shs397bn against Sudhir, maintained that Crane Bank was insulated against any legal proceedings after it was placed under receivership in line with Section 96 of the Financial Institutions Act.

READ  Court orders BoU to pay legal costs following Crane Bank case against Sudhir Ruparelia

So, in this case, Wangutusi said Crane Bank had no legal grounds to sue Sudhir.

He, however, ordered BoU to pay Sudhir all the legal cost Sudhir used in pursuing the case.

“Interestingly, the Central Bank sold and did away with the respondent (Crane Bank-in-receivership) in 2017, four days after it had been placed under receivership. In my view, after conveying all these assets to DFCU Bank together with the liabilities including deposits, the respondent was left high and dry with no property interest in any of the assets that had originally belonged to it,” Wagutusi ruled.

“In my view, the receivership was exhausted with that transfer and conveyance. The respondent (Crane Bank-in-receivership) therefore, had no locus stand (the right to appear in court) to file any suit claiming any property because it had ceased to exist. Nonetheless, the receivership would have in any case expire by now within 12 months from 24 January 2017,” Wangutusi added.

Wangutusi continued to state that;

“The total is that the respondent (Crane Bank-in-receivership), at the time it filed this suit, was not in existence, it’s lifetime having been terminated when it was surrendered to DFCU Bank whose consideration was the DFCU assumption of the respondent’s liabilities, which assumption was paid by conveying her assets to DFCU Bank.”  

The turn of the event began on June 30th, 2017.

READ  AFCON 2019: Everything you need to know ahead of DR Congo vs Uganda

This was the time Sudhir Ruparelia and Meera Investments was sued by Crane Bank-in-receivership for causing a financial loss of 397bn shillings he used in fraudulent transactions and land title transfers.

A case Sudhir denied and later won on Monday 26 after it was dismissed by the commercial court judge, Wangutusi.

This called for the celebration by Sudhir’s family and friends in a party he organised later in the evening.

According to Sudhir, this was a big win against the Mafias who had stolen his bank he had spent a lot of his time and 25 years investing into. Now the question is will Sudhir win again in the appealed case?