Patel brothers tussle over control of Motisun Group

Dar es Salaam. Motisun Group of Companies director and shareholder Ramanlal Motibhai Patel has announced his intention to sue his brother Shubhash Motibhai Patel over mismanagement of company assets.

The latter, who is the managing director and chairman of the company and also the chairman of the Confederation of Tanzania Industries (CTI), is embroiled in a feud with his brother over alleged mismanagement of company assets.

A statement by Mima Law Associates, which was advertised in the media yesterday, announced that they (Mima) have been appointed as legal advisers to Mr Ramanlal Patel.

According to their statement, since 2011 to date there has been a dispute and misunderstanding between the shareholders due to alleged mismanagement of the company by Mr Shubhash Patel.

“Our client understands that the companies are mismanaged by his younger brother who has executed various documents through forged signatures of our client Ramanlal who denies to be responsible or accepting any liabilities,” reads the advertisement in part.

Further, the statement reads that all means to resolve the dispute and misunderstanding amicably have proved futile, hence, Mr Ramanlal was informing the public that he shall commence with court proceedings to seek his rightful dues.

Efforts to contact Mr Shubhash Patel proved futile as his phone went unanswered.

However, later, a person who identified himself as assistant to Mr Patel, who asked not to be named, called The Citizen on behalf of his boss Shubash Patel and admitted that the dispute did really exist.

He, however, said that the family had resolved the dispute amicably and that they were now shocked to find the statement in the media.

“The family had already resolved the issue and we don’t understand why the lawyer decided to put it in the media,” he stressed.

However, asked for Ramanlal contacts he declined on the grounds that the said Ramanlal was outside the country and therefore he could not avail The Citizen with the number. He further claimed that he did not have the number because he had changed his handset.

Efforts to contact Mima Law Associates for further information also proved futile after a secretary, who picked up the landline number, said that the company was closed for the holidays.