https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/scc/2026/71
The court held that the respondent failed to justify the claimed auctioneer's fees, so the outstanding decretal sum was Kshs. 101,000. Although the court has discretion under Section 36(1)(a) of the Small Claims Court Act to permit instalment payments, the applicant's proposed Kshs. 20,000 monthly instalments were...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2026] SCC 71 (KLR)
- Parties
- Claimant/decree Holder: Shahina Abdulkarim Ayoob; Respondent/judgment Debtor/applicant: Peter Omari Kenani
- Court
- Small Claims Court
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Commercial Case E897 of 2025
- Procedural Posture
- Commercial Case; Application for Payment by Instalments in the Small Claims Court / Ruling on Notice of Motion Dated 3 March 2026
- Outcome
- Application partly allowed; instalment terms varied by the court
- Judges
- ["TN Mwangeka"]
- Legal Topics
- Instalment Payments of Decretal Sum, Assessment of Outstanding Decretal Amount, Auctioneer's Fees, Judgment Debt Enforcement, Discretion of Court Under Section 36 Small Claims Court Act
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Shahina Abdulkarim Ayoob
Claimant/decree Holder
Peter Omari Kenani
Respondent/judgment Debtor/applicant
Procedural Posture
Commercial Case; Application for Payment by Instalments in the Small Claims Court / Ruling on Notice of Motion Dated 3 March 2026
Legal Issues
- 1 What is the outstanding sum payable under the decree?
- 2 Whether the court should allow payment of the outstanding sum by monthly instalments as proposed by the applicant
Ratio Decidendi
The court held that the respondent failed to justify the claimed auctioneer's fees, so the outstanding decretal sum was Kshs. 101,000. Although the court has discretion under Section 36(1)(a) of the Small Claims Court Act to permit instalment payments, the applicant's proposed Kshs. 20,000 monthly instalments were unreasonable because the decree had remained unpaid for a long period and no proof of financial hardship was provided. The court therefore exercised its discretion to impose a higher instalment amount of Kshs. 40,000 monthly.
Court Disposition
Application partly allowed; instalment terms varied by the court
Orders
- Outstanding decretal sum found to be Kshs. 101,000.
- Applicant/Judgment Debtor to pay Kshs. 40,000 monthly commencing 5 June 2026 until payment in full.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
Ayoob v Kenani (Commercial Case E897 of 2025) [2026] SCC 71 (KLR) (7 May 2026) (Ruling) Neutral citation: [2026] SCC 71 (KLR) Republic of Kenya In the Small Claims Court at Mombasa Commercial Case E897 of 2025 TN Mwangeka, RM May 7, 2026 Between Shahina Abdulkarim Ayoob Claimant and Peter Omari Kenani Respondent Ruling 1.This ruling relates to a Notice of Motion Application dated 3rd March 2026 seeking orders that the Applicant/Judgment Debtor be allowed to settle the balance of the Decretal sum of Kshs. 201,000/- in monthly installments of Kshs. 20,000/-. The balance as per the Applicant/Judgment Debtor stands at Kshs. 101,000/- as he has made payments of Kshs. 70,000/- as at 5th March 2026 which has been acknowledged by the Respondent/Decree Holder. The Applicant/Judgment Debtor implores this court to consider the prevailing economic times in ruling on the application. 2.The application opposed by the Respondent/Decree Holder on the grounds that the Applicant/Judgment debtor has not shown any proof of financial hardship for this court to grant the prayers sought and that the proposal of settling the outstanding sum in monthly installments of Kshs. 20,000/- is unreasonable. I must point out that according to the Respondent/Decree Holder, the outstanding amount is Kshs. 155,135/- which amount is inclusive of auctioneer fees of Kshs. 24,135/-. 3.The sole issues for determination therefore are; a) What is the outstanding sum and b) whether this court can allow the Applicant/Judgment debtor to settle the outstanding sum in the manner proposed. 4.Regarding the outstanding sum the Applicant/Judgment Debtor takes issue with the inclusion of Kshs. 24,135/- being auctioneers fees as part of the amount owed. He states that Auctioneer fees are stipulated under the law and that the Respondent/Decree Holder has not provided any break down of how this figure was arrived at for vis a vis the law. The Respondent/Decree Holder on their part insist that auctioneer fees should be borne by the Applicant herein. 5.As righty stated by the Applicant/Judgment Debtor, Auctioneers’ fees are chargeable under Part II of the Fourth Schedule to the Auctioneers Act. When it comes to attachment distrait, or repossession, the auctioneer has to align his/her bill with the provisions of the schedule. The Respondent/Decree Holder therefore having failed to justify the said amount of Kshs. 24,135 cannot be granted the same. I note further that on the Proclamation notice the sum of Kshs. 24,135/- is listed as an estimated cost. I therefore find that the outstanding sum is Kshs. 101,000/-. 6.As to whether this court can allow the Applicant/Judgment debtor to settle the outstanding sum in the manner proposed, Section 36(1)(a) of the Small Claims Court Act, enables this court to order payment of a judgment debt in a lump sum or in such instalments and at such times as the Court may determine. This provision grants the court discretionary authority to structure payment terms without requiring the parties' consent, aligning with the Act’s objective of delivering expedient and practical justice. 7.I rely and affirm the court’s reasoning in Wamedi v Mwalughongo (Civil Appeal E069 of 2024) [2025] KEHC 7101 (KLR) (30 May 2025) (Judgment) wherein the court stated that installment orders are to be grounded on fairness and should balance the interests of both parties. 8.In the present case, this court finds that the proposal to settle the outstanding sum of Kshs. 101,000/- unreasonable considering the fact that the decree herein was issued on 30th September 2025 with the Applicant/Judgment Debtor continuously having to be forced by the Decree holder to settle the amount. Additionally, no proof of financial hardship has been availed for consideration. 9.Consequently, the Applicant/Judgement debtor is directed to pay Kshs. 40,000/- in monthly installments commencing 5th of June 2026 in settlement of the outstanding sum of Kshs. 101,000/- until payment in full. DATED SIGNED AND READ VIRTUALLY AT MOMBASA THE…7TH….DAY OF………MAY……2026HON. THERESA N. MWANGEKARESIDENT MAGISTRATE/ADJUDICATORIn the presence of;…Ms. Kasmani...for Claimant/ Decree Holder;…N/A.. for Respondent/ApplicantC/A Sabina