THE National Pension Scheme Authority (NAPSA) has dragged UPND deputy secretary general Getrude Imenda’s company, Colger Enterprises, to the Lusaka High Court, claiming payment of over K130, 000, being outstanding rental arrears owed to the authority.
NAPSA wants payment of K130,770.03 outstanding rental arrears in respect of the premises known as stand no 6976, Electra House, Cairo road, Lusaka or any other amounts the court may find as owing from the defendant (Mwambwa Getrude Imenda trading as Colger Enterprises).
It is further claiming the immediate vacant possession of Stand No. 6976, Electra House, Cairo Road, interest on the amount outstanding, costs incidental to the proceedings and any other relief the court would seem fit.
In a statement of claim filed in the Lusaka High Court commercial division, Tuesday, NAPSA explained that it was responsible and entrusted with the funds of its members, which were used to invest in properties such as the one occupied by Mwambwa Gertrude Imenda (Colger Enterprises).
It added that the defendant was at all material times an individual owning a business name registered at the Parents and Companies Registration Agency (PACRA) and trading under the name and style of Colger Enterprises.
NAPSA stated that the defedant was a tenant of NAPSA renting the premises in issue, the property owned by the authority.
It stated that it had been entering into annual tenancy agreements with the defendant for the possession and occupancy of the demised premises from the year 2017.
NAPSA stated that arising from the tenancy agreement, the defendant had throughout the term of occupation and use of the demised premises been liable to pay the agreed rent on a monthly basis.
It claimed that the defendant was inconsistent with the rental payments and had accrued a total rental debt of K130,770.03 as at August 31, 2020.
“The defendant has unjustifiably refused, failed and/or neglected to settle its rental arrears despite the plaintiffs’ demand for it to do so. The plaintiff will aver at trial that due to the defendant’s continued failure, neglect and/or deliberate refusal to honor it’s rental obligations, the plaintiff has continued to be deprived of the much needed investment returns,” stated NAPSA in its claim.