Former Imenti Central MP Gitobu Imanyara loses KSh47 million auction battle after High Court upholds Ecobank’s sale, buyer’s title and KSh91.76 million debt claim.
Former Imenti Central MP Gitobu Imanyara has lost his long-running battle with Ecobank over his Karen property.
Justice Freda Mugambi dismissed his suit and upheld the bank’s auction of the property for KSh47 million.
The court also ordered Imanyara to pay Ecobank KSh91.76 million, representing the balance allegedly remaining after the sale.
However, the bank suffered one significant setback after the judge rejected its claim for years of additional interest.
The judgement, delivered on October 2, 2026, brings the protracted legal dispute over the property closer to resolution.
Loan Unravels
The dispute began with banking facilities advanced to Imanyara in 2009, secured against his Karen residential property.
Ecobank initially provided facilities totalling KSh33.5 million, comprising a term loan and mortgage facility.
The mortgage financing was intended to fund the construction of a residential house on the property.
The original charge was registered on September 17, 2009, creating security for Imanyara’s obligations.
By 2013, however, the relationship had deteriorated as the parties negotiated a larger restructuring.
On June 6, 2013, Ecobank allowed Imanyara to sell the property privately and repay the outstanding loans.
The arrangement gave him strictly two months to find a buyer before recovery action resumed.
That deadline expired on August 6 without a completed sale or buyer being presented.
Imanyara later argued that the private-sale arrangement continued beyond that deadline.
Justice Mugambi disagreed, describing it as “a time-limited indulgence” that expired under its own terms.
The judge also found Imanyara’s subsequent conduct inconsistent with his claim that private negotiations remained binding.
He continued dealing with Ecobank over the debt and challenged later enforcement efforts on different legal grounds.
The court therefore concluded that Ecobank had not surrendered its statutory power of sale.
Auction Fight
Ecobank subsequently moved to realise the security after Imanyara defaulted on his repayment obligations.
The recovery process encountered several legal obstacles before the property was finally sold in March 2016.
A previous court ruling required Ecobank to issue fresh auctioneer notices before proceeding with the sale.
The bank complied, issuing fresh notices and obtaining two additional professional valuations before the auction.
Those valuations placed the property’s forced-sale values at approximately KSh37 million and KSh36.375 million.
The property was eventually advertised for auction and sold on March 23, 2016, for KSh47 million.
Opondo Isaac Ochieng emerged as the highest bidder after offering the winning price.
Imanyara challenged the process, arguing that the statutory notices had become stale before the eventual auction.
He also claimed that Ecobank failed to obtain the best price reasonably available for the property.
Justice Mugambi rejected both arguments after examining the notices, valuations and history of failed auctions.
The judge held that an unsuccessful auction did not extinguish Ecobank’s statutory power of sale.
Instead, later advertisements represented a continuation of the same recovery process rather than an entirely new sale.
The KSh47 million price also exceeded both forced-sale valuations obtained by Ecobank before the auction.
Imanyara relied on a separate KSh76.5 million valuation, but its author was never called to testify.
The court therefore found insufficient evidence showing that a substantially better price was reasonably obtainable.
Money Trail
The handling of the KSh47 million auction proceeds became another major point of contention.
Imanyara accused Ecobank of failing to properly explain how the sale proceeds were applied.
He pointed to several letters requesting statements, reconciliation, and clarification of the outstanding loan balance.
Ecobank responded by producing certified statements covering the relevant period and a settlement account.
The documents showed credits totalling KSh43.53 million between March 2016 and July 2017.
The remaining amount represented auctioneer fees, legal expenses, and other costs associated with recovering the debt.
Justice Mugambi accepted the bank’s explanation after Imanyara failed to identify specific accounting errors.
He neither produced an alternative reconciliation nor called an accountant to challenge Ecobank’s calculations.
The judge therefore found that the auction proceeds had been properly received and credited to the loan account.
Imanyara also invoked the Banking Act’s in duplum rule, challenging Ecobank’s KSh91.76 million claim.
He argued that interest and charges had accumulated beyond the statutory ceiling applicable to non-performing loans.
The court rejected that argument because he failed to establish when the loan became non-performing.
He also failed to demonstrate the principal outstanding then, the applicable ceiling, or any excess above that ceiling.
The judge consequently found the KSh91.76 million balance proved and recoverable.
Buyer Prevails
Ochieng’s title became another crucial battleground because Imanyara sought cancellation of the subsequent transfer.
The buyer maintained that he had purchased the property honestly through a public auction without knowing about Imanyara’s dispute.
He had seen the newspaper advertisement, attended the auction, inspected the property, and conducted searches.
The court found no evidence establishing fraud, collusion, or prior knowledge of the dispute.
Ochieng initially paid a KSh11.75 million deposit but failed to clear the balance within ninety days.
Ecobank nevertheless extended the payment period rather than rescinding the transaction under the auction conditions.
The judge found that arrangement permissible and noted that the purchase price was eventually paid in full.
Ochieng later obtained financing from Ecobank itself to complete the purchase, raising another challenge from Imanyara.
Justice Mugambi rejected that argument because the financing occurred months after the auction.
“The financing could not have influenced the price, which was fixed by the bidding,” the judge ruled.
The court therefore recognised Ochieng as a bona fide purchaser and upheld his title.
Ecobank ultimately secured judgement for KSh91,759,103.66 but failed to obtain contractual and penal interest dating back to 2017.
Justice Mugambi held that additional interest could push the recovery beyond the statutory in duplum ceiling.
READ ALSO: Court Awards Woman 75% Share of Karen Home After Bitter Divorce Property Battle
Instead, the bank will receive interest at court rates from October 2, 2026, until the judgement debt is fully paid.
Imanyara was also ordered to pay the costs of his suit, Ecobank’s counterclaim, and Ochieng’s litigation costs.
The ruling leaves the former legislator facing both the loss of his property challenge and a substantial judgement debt.
PAY ATTENTION: Reach us at info@gotta.news.
