The Directors of an Advertising Agency now risk arrest after the High Court declined to stop the DCI from arresting them over a barter trade dispute of 3 Motor Vehicles valued at Ksh7.5 million, Kenyan Digest Reported today.
Samir Shah the General Manager of Adsite Ltd ,and fellow directors Ramesh shah , Nasim Shah had moved to court seeking anticipatory bail over a payment dispute with Marshalls East Africa Limited a Motor vehicle dealer and sales company.
Adsite Limited says it has been operation since 1970 and have previously engaged in business activities with Marshals Ltd.
In their petition before Justice Weldon Korir the three claim that officers from the Directorate of Criminal Investigation have been stalking and trailing them at there homes and offices in Parklands.
“We have been stalked and trailed to our offices and on the roads by DCI officers purportedly from Nairobi Criminal Investigation office who leave threatening messages to employees and guards directed at us that the suit motor vehicles shall be seized and we will be arrested”,they claim.
Shah says that in 2017,Marshals through it’s Sales Manager approached his Company with a proposal to sell its KIA 2700 Pick up Motor vehicles.
He says that they entered into a sale agreement where they were to pay a deposit of Ksh1.5 million and the balance of Ksh5,850,000 would be settled by way of a set off against costs of outdoor advertisement services to be procured by Marshals limited over a period of one year.
He adds that he deposited Ksh500,000 to Marshal Ltd and on May 10, 2017 issued two other cheques covering a balance of the deposit of Ksh1 million.
He says despite making the payments Marshalls Ltd took the vehicles from their showroom.
The dispute he says is a barter trade contract gone wrong as the Ad agency did it’s part by putting up additional billboards along James Gichuru Road, Peponi Road ,Museum Road and Masaai drive.
The directors say the dispute between them and East Africa Marshall is purely a civil matter and essentially a disagreement or misunderstanding over the mode of payment of the outstanding purchase price of the vehicles arising over a binding and valid agreement that is presently in court.B
