InfoHub Logo

A protracted legal battle has concluded with the cassation court upholding previous rulings, denying a former director's claim for 892.4 million tenge from the Lugovskoye Horse Plant LLP.

Dispute with the Abykaev Family

The case involved a long-standing dispute between the former director, Khalit Bazaraliev, and the Abykaev family, who have owned the enterprise since 2007. Bazaraliev asserted that he had temporarily invested his personal funds into the plant's development between 2009 and 2018. However, following a conflict with Marat Abykaev, Bazaraliev reportedly suffered a heart attack, underwent multiple surgeries, became disabled, and was subsequently dismissed from his directorial position.

Legal Proceedings

After his dismissal, Bazaraliev sought to recover his funds through legal channels. He also approached law enforcement agencies, but the dispute was deemed to be of a civil-legal nature, and no criminal case was initiated.

In December 2024, the Turaar Ryskulov District Court initially rejected Bazaraliev's claim. This decision was affirmed by the Zhambyl Regional Court in February 2025. Subsequently, Bazaraliev's representative filed a cassation appeal.

Cassation Court's Decision

On January 29, 2026, the cassation instance reviewed the case and found no grounds for a retrial. The court's judges emphasized that the claimant failed to prove unjust enrichment on the part of the respondent.

The ruling stated: "Considering the timeliness, number, and purpose of the payments, as well as the payments made by Kh. B. Bazaraliev at various times as the executive body of the partnership, they are considered without error and, accordingly, there is no unjust enrichment of the respondent."

Furthermore, the court noted that the claimant did not provide original copies for many of the initial payment documents. The case materials contained only one receipt for 73 million tenge, with all other confirmations being mere copies. A court-appointed economic expert was unable to determine the exact amount of funds provided due to the lack of original documents.

The court also stated, "Additionally, the courts reasonably applied the statute of limitations. No evidence was presented that the claimant was deprived of the opportunity to seek legal recourse within the period established by law."

Bazaraliev's Discontent

Bazaraliev expressed his disagreement with the cassation court's decision, arguing that the court overlooked key evidence and merely rubber-stamped previous rulings.

"Despite the official certificate from Eurasian Bank and documents stamped for sums exceeding 583 million tenge, the court only recognized a single receipt for 73 million tenge. Other payment documents, including cash receipts, were ignored by the court and not commented upon," he stated indignantly.

Bazaraliev believes that when all submitted sums are considered, the issue involves hundreds of millions of tenge and extends beyond a simple civil dispute.

Future Plans

In conclusion, the cassation court upheld the ruling of the Zhambyl Regional Court, denying the appeal. However, Bazaraliev is not ready to give up. He plans to appeal to the Supreme Court and the Prosecutor General's Office, seeking a review of the case and a legal assessment of circumstances he believes were not adequately considered by the courts.