Choudry faces sh126m counter-claim from constructor

Nov 13, 2014

A construction firm embroiled in a sh693m battle with Justice Anup Singh Choudry over his house purportedly demolished without his consent, has made a sh126m counter-claim

By Andante Okanya

 

A construction firm embroiled in a sh693m battle with Justice Anup Singh Choudry over his house purportedly demolished without his consent, has made a sh126m counter-claim.

 

On October 23, Coronation Developers Uganda Limited filed its counter-claim at the civil division of the High Court in Kampala, contending that the Choudry is indebted to the company.

 

The sh126m is for both work performed(sh53.7m) plus damages(sh72.4m) The counter-claim was filed together with a defence, disproving Choudry’s demand of sh693m, as compensation for the house located on Plot 1, Nambi Road,Entebbe, Wakiso district.

 

The case arose this year on October 3, when Choudry filed a civil suit accusing Coronation Development Uganda Limited, Mohinder Singh Channa, and another named as N.S Channa, of breach of contract.

 

Choudry also accuses them of trespass, negligence, anxiety, and distress. But through Mbeeta, Kamya, and Company Advocates, the firm brands Choudry dishonest, stating that he agreed to the demolition.

 

“The defendants state that the plaintiff consented to and had full knowledge of the demolition exercise before the third defendant (firm) commenced operations,” the defence states in part.

 

The firm explains that the house was inherently weak with unstable and damp walls, a shallow foundation, and termite bitten timber doors, frames and windows.

 

According to court documents, Choudry bought the bungalow in 2008 at sh285m, a fact he claims was disclosed to the defendants. A copy of the sale agreement and the land title are attached.

 

Documents further show that in a letter from the firm addressed to Choudry dated September 1, 2008, refurbishment of the house was estimated at sh285.9m

 

Documents also show that he took an insurance policy on the property against fire and related risks.

 

He stresses that by July 17, 2008, his property was in a fair state but he needed some repairs and extensions to create extra space. The firm acknowledges receipt of sh50m partial cash payment advanced by Choudry to commence work.

 

However, he states that the defendants explained to him that demolition resulted from the engineers’ advice that the structure was too weak and could not be refurbished.

 

Choudry states that consequently, his insurers Gold Star Insurance Company paid him sh60.9m as indemnity under his household policy.

 

He notes that his insurers verified the loss, found out that the defendants had been negligent, and advised him to demand compensation from the firm, if he desired.

 

But the firm has vowed to raise a preliminary objection when hearing commences. It argues that Choudry filed the suit in bad faith “selfishly with a view of achieving double enrichment”.

 

The case has been allocated to Justice Stephen Musota. However, a hearing date is yet to be scheduled.

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});