Glee Hotel Limited, an establishment linked to businesswoman Mary Wambui Mungai, has been placed under administration over a debt of Sh7.75 billion.
In a notice placed in the newspapers, Equity Bank Kenya Limited stated that it had appointed Kamal Anantroy Bhatt as the administrator of the hotel and noted that any party with a claim against the company should write to the administrator.
“Pursuant to section 563(2) (b) of the Insolvency Act 2015 of Kenya, notice is hereby given that effective 6th July 2026, Kamal Anantroy Bhatt, of Anant Bhatt LLP, has been appointed as administrator of Glee Hotel Ltd by Equity Bank Kenya Ltd,” the notice read.
The notice added that with the appointment, the administrator has taken control over assets and the management of the affairs of the company.
“By virtue of Administration, the powers of the Directors of the company in terms of dealing and or transacting with the company’s Assets have ceased,” the notice added.
Last month, the High Court gave the businesswoman seven days to pay Sh100 million to Equity Bank, as a condition for rescuing the luxurious hotel from auction.
"The suspension is on condition that the applicant pays to the respondent a sum of Sh100 million within seven days of the date of this ruling, in default of which the order of suspension shall automatically lapse," the judge said.
The ruling was prompted by Ms Wambui seeking an additional 60 days to comply with a consent agreement entered into with Equity Bank in February.
Under the consent recorded on February 24, 2026, Equity Bank agreed to accept Sh7.75 billion in full as final settlement of outstanding debt owed by Ms Wambui and related entities. The amount represented about 85 per cent of the total indebtedness and was to be financed through a refinancing arrangement by KCB Bank Kenya.
The agreement required payment within 45 days, with the parties expressly stating that time was of the essence. It further provided that failure to pay within the stipulated period would entitle Equity Bank to rescind the settlement and pursue recovery of the full debt, together with interest and costs, through enforcement of securities.
The debt was secured by several properties, including parcels of land on which the upscale Glee Hotel is built.
Ms Wambui, who is also the chairperson of the Athi Water Works Development Agency, moved to court after the 45-day period expired without payment being made.
She argued that the refinancing transaction with KCB had substantially progressed but had been delayed by the complexity of the deal and extensive due diligence requirements imposed by the proposed financier.
She urged the court to grant a 60-day extension to enable completion of the transaction and avert the sale of the hotel.
Equity Bank opposed the application, arguing that the dispute had already been settled through a binding consent judgment voluntarily entered into by the parties.
The bank maintained that the court had become functus officio and could not vary the terms of the agreement.
In response, the bank's representative argued that the application was effectively an attempt to rewrite the consent judgment without the lender's agreement.
The court agreed that it lacked jurisdiction to alter the terms of the negotiated settlement.
The court noted that the amount agreed upon and the 45-day payment period formed the foundation of the bargain reached between the parties.
"The defendant's willingness to accept the discounted settlement figure was plainly predicated on payment being made within the stipulated time frame. To extend that period would be to alter a fundamental term of the bargain struck by the parties," the court said.
The judge emphasised that Ms Wambui had not alleged fraud, mistake, misrepresentation, collusion or any other grounds that would justify setting aside the consent judgment. Instead, she acknowledged both the debt and the validity of the agreement.
Consequently, the court dismissed the request for a 60-day extension.
However, the judge took a different view regarding the alternative request to suspend the bank's statutory remedies under the Land Act.
While noting that the applicants had presented evidence showing that discussions with KCB had progressed beyond a mere expression of interest, the court observed that no conclusive proof had been provided to demonstrate that the refinancing had been finalised.
"There is no evidence of an executed facility agreement, no binding commitment by the proposed refinancier, no undertaking to discharge the defendant's debt, and there is no evidence that any part of the settlement amount has been paid," the judge said.,
