[2010] KEHC 3100 (KLR)

[2010] KEHC 3100 (KLR)

The court found that the motor vehicles in question did not belong to the 1st Defendant, and there was no evidence connecting the Applicants to the 2nd Defendant in relation to the vehicles, except as customers of the garage. The 2nd Defendant failed to prove ownership of the vehicles by the 1st Defendant, and the 1st Defendant supported the Applicants' claim. Therefore, the court held that the 2nd Defendant's action of levying distress for rent on the Applicants' vehicles was unlawful. The court granted the Applicants' prayers for a temporary injunction restraining the 2nd Defendant from attaching or selling the vehicles and ordered the release of the vehicles to the Applicants.

Citation
[2010] KEHC 3100 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Janet Mwende Kimeli; Plaintiff: Zahid Enterprises Ltd; Plaintiff: Road Runer Carriers Ltd; Plaintiff: Ashok Panchal; Plaintiff: Imperial Bank; Plaintiff: Max Transporters; Defendant: Dilbagh Singh Brothers (Investment) Limited; Defendant: Kenya Railways Corporation
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Judgment Date
19 February 2010
Case Number
Civil Case 17 of 2010
Procedural Posture
Civil Case / Ruling on Chamber Summons for Temporary Injunction
Outcome
Chamber Summons dated 18th January 2010 granted as prayed.
Judges
JM Khamoni
Legal Topics
Temporary Injunctions, Distress for Rent, Ownership of Property, Recovery of Rent
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Land and Property Temporary Injunctions Distress for Rent Ownership of Property Recovery of Rent

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Janet Mwende Kimeli

Plaintiff

Zahid Enterprises Ltd

Plaintiff

Road Runer Carriers Ltd

Plaintiff

Ashok Panchal

Plaintiff

Imperial Bank

Plaintiff

Max Transporters

Plaintiff

Dilbagh Singh Brothers (Investment) Limited

Defendant

Kenya Railways Corporation

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Case / Ruling on Chamber Summons for Temporary Injunction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the 2nd Defendant was entitled to levy distress for rent on motor vehicles not owned by the 1st Defendant.
  2. 2 Whether the Plaintiffs are entitled to a temporary injunction restraining the 2nd Defendant from attaching and selling their motor vehicles.
  3. 3 Whether the Defendants should be compelled to release the motor vehicles to the Plaintiffs.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the motor vehicles in question did not belong to the 1st Defendant, and there was no evidence connecting the Applicants to the 2nd Defendant in relation to the vehicles, except as customers of the garage. The 2nd Defendant failed to prove ownership of the vehicles by the 1st Defendant, and the 1st Defendant supported the Applicants' claim. Therefore, the court held that the 2nd Defendant's action of levying distress for rent on the Applicants' vehicles was unlawful. The court granted the Applicants' prayers for a temporary injunction restraining the 2nd Defendant from attaching or selling the vehicles and ordered the release of the vehicles to the Applicants.

Court Disposition

Chamber Summons dated 18th January 2010 granted as prayed.

Orders

  • Temporary injunction granted restraining the 2nd Defendant, its agents and/or officers from levying distress, attaching, advertising for sale, or selling the Plaintiffs' properties in furtherance of the distress for rent levied by Messrs Sadique Enterprises.
  • Temporary mandatory injunction granted compelling the Defendants/Respondents to release to the Applicants motor vehicles registration numbers KAX 731 K, KAU 254 Q, KAV 883 T, KAM 912 K, ZB 8280.