Final Results On Zambezi Portland Cement Announced, Finsbury Investments Majority Shareholder

Zambia comes under developing nation category and has been facing several challenges in its political, social and economic climate. Issues of corruption and unethical business practices are rampant across both public and private sector enterprises. In such case, having an ethical and transparent business practice often becomes challenging and biggest roadblock and many businessmen have given up on this path. However, there are few businessmen still left in Zambia who are completely ethical and transparent with fair business practices. Dr. Rajan Lekhraj Mahtani is one of them and for the past ten years, he fought for the legal takeover of the Zambezi Portland Cement factory. The case was registered at the Lusaka High Court where despite sharing strong and factual information, the decision was controversial. The judge at the Lusaka High Court was justice Nkonde who announced that Ventriglias were only shareholders of the Zambezi Portland Cement. Since this decision was controversial, Dr. Rajan Mahtani then approached the Court of Appeal.

The Court of Appeal is one of the highest civilian courts in Zambia and it did not disappoint. On 31^st January 2019, the final decision on Portland Cement Zambia case was announced. The judge at the Court of Appeal was judge Mwinde and he announced that the judge below him was wrong in declaring Ventriglias as the only shareholders. Furthermore, he announced that Dr. Rajan Mahtani owned Finsbury Investments was majority shareholder of the Zambezi Portland Cement with 58 percent shares at the factory. On the other hand, Ventriglias owned Ital Terrazzo Limited is the minority shareholder of the cement factory with only 42 percent shares. This shareholding pattern aligns with the original shareholders agreement which was established in the year 2007. With this decision, the judge from the Court of Appeal effectively reversed the judgement from Lusaka High Court.

Furthermore, all allegations of forgery were discarded by the court of Appeal judge as they were found to be irrelevant and baseless.