A long-running dispute between Bank of Baroda (Kenya) and Infinity Industrial Park has escalated into a legal battle over the control of a multi-billion shilling industrial project on Nairobi’s Eastern Bypass.
The dispute, which began with a Sh1.976 billion loan advanced to Infinity in 2019, has resulted in competing claims of default, damages, delayed release of charged land and, most recently, an attempt by the bank to place Infinity under administration.
Infinity says the bank’s actions have disrupted its operations, damaged its reputation and undermined efforts to attract fresh investment into the industrial park.
The bank, on the other hand, has maintained that Infinity defaulted on its loan obligations and that it was entitled to exercise its rights as a secured lender.
The latest phase of the dispute followed the appointment of joint administrators on August 10, 2026, with Infinity subsequently obtaining interim orders that resulted in the administrators leaving the premises on August 27.
The company is now awaiting further directions from the High Court, with another hearing scheduled for October 5. Also pending is an application to cite the bank’s directors with contempt of court.
The loan was advanced in 2019 to finance the development of Infinity Industrial Park, including infrastructure and warehouses at Njiru on the Eastern Bypass. The facility was secured against several properties, including the industrial park land.
Infinity managing director and chairman Ashok Rupshi Shah said in court documents that the company borrowed the money when the economy was performing strongly and proceeded with the first phase of the project despite the disruption caused by Covid-19.
Court documents show Infinity completed the first phase in 2021 despite the pandemic and continued servicing the facility using income from other sources and proceeds from the sale of other assets.
By December 2023, the company said it had repaid about Sh500 million in principal and approximately Sh800 million in interest.
However, the pandemic, followed by the 2022 election year, disrupted the company’s cash flows and projections.
Mr Shah said Infinity subsequently sought restructuring of the facility and additional financing to develop more warehouses, but the requests were not approved.
The company claims that failure to obtain a partial discharge of about 15 acres, including 10 acres earmarked for a second cluster of warehouses, prevented it from securing additional financing for the development.
Infinity says the second cluster would have comprised 50 warehouses and generated an additional cash flow of about Sh2 billion.
The company also alleges that the bank delayed for about 14 months in discharging a title after a change of user had been approved, preventing it from transferring warehouses that had already been sold and restricting its ability to generate revenue.
The bank disputed the allegations in earlier proceedings, arguing that Infinity was in default and that the lender was entitled to retain the security until the debt was repaid.
In one of the applications, the bank said Infinity had failed to pay Sh55.94 million in interest on time, causing the facility to become non-performing.
The court at that stage found that the loan and charge documents entitled the bank to hold the security until the debt was settled. It also held that Infinity’s allegations concerning delays involved contested facts that should be determined at trial rather than through an interim application.
The court declined to order the release of land or withdrawal of credit listings, noting that such orders amounted to mandatory injunctions requiring an unusually strong and clear case.
Infinity later filed a separate suit in June 2024 seeking damages from the bank.
According to court records, the bank did not file its defence within the prescribed period despite several court appearances and reminders. On September 8, 2025, the High Court entered default judgment in favour of Infinity in terms of prayers in its plaint, including a claim for special damages of about Sh2.996 billion.
Bank of Baroda subsequently applied to have the judgment set aside but the application was dismissed on July 31, 2026. The court found that the bank had been given an opportunity to file its defence but failed to comply before the pre-trial conference.
The bank had argued that its intended defence raised triable issues concerning, among other matters, a replacement charge over the industrial park property, the amount secured and a statutory notice relating to a Sh2 billion claim.
The court, however, held that the existence of triable issues did not by itself justify reopening the case.
Infinity says the judgment also contained a permanent injunction restraining the bank from advertising for sale, selling or disposing of the Njiru property, taking possession of it, appointing receivers or administrators, or otherwise interfering with the property.
The company argues that the bank subsequently breached the order when it issued an insolvency notice on August 10, 2026 and appointed Ponangipalli Venkata Ramana Rao and Swaroop Rao Ponangipalli as joint administrators.
“That notwithstanding its knowledge of the subsisting judgment and order of the court and barely ten (10) days after its application to set aside the judgment was dismissed, the Defendant/Respondent, purported on 10th August 2026 to appoint Ponangipalli Venkata Ramana Rao and Swaroop Rao Ponangipalli as Joint Administrators over the whole property and affairs of the Plaintiff in direct contravention of the default judgment,” Mr Shah said in an affidavit filed in court.
The administrators entered the industrial park on August 11 and took possession of Infinity’s offices and records, according to the company.
In its application Infinity says its employees were immediately terminated and that its offices were locked, disrupting services to the 31 companies operating within the industrial park.
The company claims the takeover caused significant reputational damage, particularly after notices were published indicating that the industrial park was under administration.
The administrators remained at the property for about 17 days as the parties returned to court.
Infinity subsequently challenged the appointment and sought orders restoring the previous position.
“That immediately following the purported appointment, the alleged administrators proceeded on 11th August 2026 to assert control over the plaintiff's affairs, demand possession and control of its assets, title documents, books and records, displace the authority of its directors and take steps affecting its employees, thereby demonstrating that the impugned appointment was being actively implemented,” he said.
In a ruling concerning a preliminary objection, the court held that the appointment of the administrators had taken legal effect upon the lodging of the notice on August 11.
However, the court declined to strike out Infinity’s challenge altogether, instead allowing the company to withdraw the application and file a properly instituted application. “Fairness demands that the Company be given the opportunity to have its grievance heard properly. I will therefore extend a lifeline to the Company. It may withdraw the present application and file a proper one, correctly instituted, within 14 days,” said the court.
The court said the underlying issues surrounding the validity of the appointment remained open for determination.
Infinity has separately argued that the appointment was made in breach of the earlier injunction and has sought to have Bank of Baroda’s directors and the administrators cited for contempt.
The company says the bank relied on an alleged debt of about Sh2.2 billion to justify the administration, despite Infinity holding a judgment for special damages of about Sh2.996 billion against the lender.
Mr Shah, who is also the majority shareholder, says he has a personal interest in the dispute because he guaranteed loans advanced to the company.
He argues that the administration would have deprived him of the benefits of the judgment and affected his obligations arising from the guarantees.
Infinity says the industrial park currently supports about 1,000 jobs, with the potential to create about 20,000 direct jobs and 50,000 indirect jobs when fully occupied.
The company estimates the value of the property at more than Sh10 billion, based on a valuation commissioned by the bank, against an outstanding debt that it puts at about Sh1.5 billion.
Bank of Baroda has denied the characterisation of the dispute, maintaining that the company remains indebted to the lender and that its rights as a secured creditor have not been extinguished by the court proceedings.
