By The Weekly Vision Reporter
Prime Bank Limited is facing questions over a KSh350 million loan facility reportedly secured using a title deed whose ownership is the subject of a dispute involving a prime parcel of land in Spring Valley, Nairobi. The loan facility is understood to have been advanced against Land Reference No. 11390, with businessman Rajesh Maneklal Rughani and two associated companies, Crason Park Limited and Crason Holdings Limited, listed as beneficiaries.
Documents seen by this publication indicate that neither Mr Rughani nor the two companies appear as the registered owners of the property. This has raised questions about the circumstances under which the title was accepted as security for the facility by the lender.
Ordinarily, before accepting land as collateral, banks are expected to conduct due diligence, including an official search through the Ministry of Lands and Physical Planning to verify ownership, confirm the authenticity of the title, establish the existence of any encumbrances, obtain an independent valuation and ensure that all legal requirements have been met. It is not clear whether these procedures were followed in this case or whether the bank may itself have relied on information that was later found to be inaccurate.
The Weekly Vision sought to establish whether the matter has been brought to the attention of the Directorate of Criminal Investigations (DCI) or the Ministry of Lands and Physical Planning in relation to allegations concerning the title, and whether either authority has commenced any investigations.
On 30 May 2026, The Weekly Vision wrote to Prime Bank’s Executive Director, Mr Amar Kantaria, seeking clarification on the transaction, the due diligence undertaken before the facility was approved, and whether the bank had initiated any internal review involving staff, valuers or relationship managers connected to the transaction. No response had been received by the time of publication.
The case highlights broader concerns about the challenges financial institutions face in verifying land titles used as loan security, particularly against the backdrop of longstanding concerns over fraudulent and disputed land documentation. It also raises wider questions about the extent of a lender’s responsibility where property offered as collateral subsequently becomes the subject of competing ownership claims. No court has, at the time of publication, determined any wrongdoing by Prime Bank or any of the individuals or companies mentioned in this article.
