In a high-profile legal dispute, Deputy Registrar Catherine Ng’ang’a of the Nairobi Family Division has recused herself from handling a case involving businessman Suresh Kantaria and his ex-wife, Mradula Kantaria. The case concerns a long-standing property dispute following the couple’s 2005 divorce and a 2015 Court of Appeal decision that directed their properties be sold and shared in a 3:1 ratio in favor of Suresh.
Mradula wants the properties auctioned, with the proceeds placed in an escrow account managed by her lawyers, while Suresh has proposed that the properties be valuated for sale at the best current market rates. The businessman accused Deputy Registrar Ng’ang’a of bias and petitioned the Judicial Service Commission (JSC) for her removal from office, a move that Ng’ang’a viewed as an attempt to intimidate her and delay the case.
In her ruling, Ng’ang’a acknowledged the complaint pending before the JSC and decided to step down from the case, noting that there was no stay order on the pending sale terms. The case will now be reassigned to another deputy registrar, with a mention scheduled for September 26 to finalize the terms of sale.
The case also involves Suresh’s obligation to pay his ex-wife Ksh. 350,000 monthly for upkeep, as ordered by the court until her death or remarriage.
Suresh Kantaria and his former wife, Mradula Kantaria, remain in a legal battle over how to sell their matrimonial properties following their 2005 divorce. The properties, which include two houses and a plot in South C and a parcel of land in Gigiri, were ordered by the Court of Appeal in 2015 to be sold, with the proceeds shared in a 3:1 ratio in favor of Suresh.
Suresh has proposed that each co-owner be allowed to find buyers independently, with the properties sold to those offering the best market prices. He believes this method would expedite the process and help resolve the ongoing legal disputes swiftly.
However, Mradula insists that the sale proceeds should be held in an escrow account managed by her lawyers, from which she would receive Ksh. 350,000 monthly for upkeep, as ordered by the Court of Appeal. She asserts in her affidavit that this arrangement should remain in place for her lifetime, as she does not intend to remarry. The disagreement over these differing approaches to the property sale continues to be a point of contention in their legal dispute.
