[2007] KEHC 2242 (KLR)
The court found that the applicants had demonstrated a legitimate apprehension that the respondent's assets, being the subject properties, might be alienated before their claim for dues is determined. The court held that it has the power to grant an inhibition order to preserve the status quo and prevent any...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2007] KEHC 2242 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Francis Mwenda & 113 Others; Respondent: The Liquidator Abogeta Farmers Co-op Society Ltd
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Meru
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Civil Suit 178 of 2002
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Suit / Ruling on Ex Parte Application for Inhibition
- Outcome
- Application allowed. Inhibition order granted.
- Legal Topics
- Inhibition Orders, Preservation of Property, Liquidation of Company Assets
- 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
Francis Mwenda & 113 Others
Applicant
The Liquidator Abogeta Farmers Co-op Society Ltd
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Suit / Ruling on Ex Parte Application for Inhibition
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the applicants are entitled to an order of inhibition to prevent dealings with the respondent's properties pending determination of their claim.
- 2 Whether the court has jurisdiction and discretion to grant an inhibition order in the circumstances.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the applicants had demonstrated a legitimate apprehension that the respondent's assets, being the subject properties, might be alienated before their claim for dues is determined. The court held that it has the power to grant an inhibition order to preserve the status quo and prevent any dealings with the properties in question. The merits of the applicants' underlying claim were not determined at this stage, but the need to protect the subject matter justified the grant of the inhibition order. The court was satisfied that the properties were registered in the respondent's name and that the applicants' interests would be prejudiced if the assets were disposed of...
Court Disposition
Application allowed. Inhibition order granted.
Orders
- An order of inhibition is issued, inhibiting registration of any dealings in L.R. No.s Abogeta/L.Kithangari/599, Abogeta/UpperKiungone/1039, Abogeta/UpperKiringa/561, Abogeta/L.Kiungone/516, Abogeta/U.Kiungone/1041, Abogeta/L.Kithangari/816, and Abogeta/L.Kiungone/560, all registered in the name of the respondent...
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
20 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA
AT MERU
Civil Suit 178 of 2002
FRANCIS MWENDA & 113 OTHERS................................................APPLICANTS/PLAINTIFFS
VERSUS
THE LIQUIDATOR ABOGETA FARMERSCO-OP SOCIETY LTD.....RESPONDENTS/DEFENDANTS
RULING
This application was argued exparte as the respondent or counsel, despite service, did not respond or attend the hearing.
The application is for inhibition of certain properties registered in the name of Abogeta Farmers Co-operative Society Ltd, now under liquidation. The applicants, 113 in number state through one of them, Geoffrey Nkonge, that they are former employees of Abogeta Co-operative Society Ltd (the company) who are owed certain dues by the company.
They are apprehensive that they may not realize their dues which form the basis of the suit herein if the only assets of the company sought to be inhibited are alienated.
They aver that in Meru CMCC No.112/2001, an inhibition had been issued but the same lapsed or vacated when the Chief Magistrate’s court declared that it had no jurisdiction in the matter, hence the present application.
For purposes of maintaining status quo pending the occurrence of a particular event, the court has powers to make an order inhibiting the registration of any dealing with any land.
The court at this stage, in exercising this discretion, is concerned with ensuring that the subject matter is not wasted or alienated before the event upon which the inhibition order is sought. In this case the applicants allege that the company owes them certain dues that they fear may not be paid if the properties they seek to inhibit dealings in are not preserved.
The merits of that claim is not in issue. In the result I am persuaded that in the interest of justice the applicants are entitled to the orders sought. It is now ordered that there shall be an order of inhibition, inhibiting registration of any dealings in L.R.No.s.Abogeta/L.Kithangari/599,Abogeta/UpperKiungone/1039,
Abogeta/UpperKiringa/561,Abogeta/L.Kiungone/516,Abogeta/U.Kiungone/1041,Abogeta/L.Kithangari/816 and Abogeta/L.Kiungone/560, which have been shown to my satisfaction are all registered in the name of the company.
Orders accordingly.
DATED AND DELIVERED AT MERU THIS 20TH DAY OF JULY, 2007
W. OUKO
JUDGE