In court papers filed before the Environment and Land Court in Nairobi, Sanghani has sued Thomas Kilonzo Mwanza and Karen Nkatha Rimita over property known as Nairobi/Block 6/263/8 SAGE DEVELOPMENT.
According to the suit, the parties entered into a sale agreement dated December 18, 2025, under which Sanghani agreed to purchase the property for Ksh 70 million.
Sanghani claims the property was at risk of being auctioned on December 19, 2025, forcing him to urgently intervene by paying Ksh 7 million directly to Stanbic Bank to redeem the charged property and halt the planned auction.
Court documents indicate that the amount formed part of the 10 per cent deposit under the sale agreement and was paid into the loan account tied to the property for purposes of partial redemption of the existing charge.
The businessman argues that after the auction threat was averted, the defendants allegedly attempted to withdraw from the agreement despite benefiting from his financial intervention.
In a witness statement filed in court, Sanghani says he also advanced an additional Ksh 1 million to the first defendant to facilitate the transaction.
The court further heard that on January 29, 2026, lawyers acting for Karen Nkatha Rimita issued a notice expressing intention to terminate the transaction and proposed refunding the Ksh 7 million deposit subject to execution of a mutual termination and discharge agreement.
However, Sanghani maintains that no such agreement was ever signed.
He further accuses the defendants of failing to provide completion documents required under the sale agreement before later declaring that the transaction had lapsed.
In the suit, Sanghani describes the defendants’ conduct as “wrongful, inequitable and unconscionable repudiation” of the agreement after allegedly obtaining relief from the threatened auction using his funds.
He is now seeking orders restraining the defendants from advertising, selling, transferring, charging or otherwise dealing with the property pending the hearing and determination of the case.
In a supporting affidavit filed before the court, Sanghani states that he “materially altered” his position by stepping in to shield the property from auction and relieve the defendants from pressure arising from the bank charge.
He argues that unless the court intervenes urgently, the property risks being transferred to third parties despite his role in preserving it from auction.
The matter is pending before the Environment and Land Court in Nairobi.
