[2009] KEHC 771 (KLR)

[2009] KEHC 771 (KLR)

The court found that the application for a garnishee order was meritorious as it was properly brought under the relevant provisions of the Civil Procedure Rules and Act. The plaintiffs, as decree holders, demonstrated that there were monies held by the garnishee bank in the defendants' account that could be attached...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2009] KEHC 771 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Johnson Wachira Mugo; Plaintiff: Moses Wangai Njoroge; Plaintiff: Elizabeth Savethi Wangai; Plaintiff: Florence Soila Ngossorr; Defendant: Sasanet Investments Co-operative Society Limited; Defendant: Sasanet Limited; Defendant: Michael Chege; Defendant: Sammy Gitau; Garnishee: Equity Bank Limited (Upperhill Branch)
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Commercial Courts)
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Case 479 of 2007
Procedural Posture
Civil Case / Ruling on Ex Parte Garnishee Application
Outcome
application allowed in terms of prayer No. 2; garnishee to show cause
Judges
A. Ong’injo
Legal Topics
Garnishee Orders, Execution of Decrees, Attachment of Debts
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Garnishee Orders Execution of Decrees Attachment of Debts

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Johnson Wachira Mugo

Plaintiff

Moses Wangai Njoroge

Plaintiff

Elizabeth Savethi Wangai

Plaintiff

Florence Soila Ngossorr

Plaintiff

Sasanet Investments Co-operative Society Limited

Defendant

Sasanet Limited

Defendant

Michael Chege

Defendant

Sammy Gitau

Defendant

Equity Bank Limited (Upperhill Branch)

Garnishee

Procedural Posture

Civil Case / Ruling on Ex Parte Garnishee Application

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiffs are entitled to a garnishee order attaching monies held by the garnishee bank in satisfaction of the decree.
  2. 2 Whether the garnishee should be ordered to show cause why it should not pay the decree holders the amount held in the account.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the application for a garnishee order was meritorious as it was properly brought under the relevant provisions of the Civil Procedure Rules and Act. The plaintiffs, as decree holders, demonstrated that there were monies held by the garnishee bank in the defendants' account that could be attached in satisfaction of the decree. The court exercised its discretion to grant prayer No. 2 of the application, ordering the garnishee to attend court and show cause why it should not pay the decree holders the amount held in the account, thereby facilitating the execution of the judgment in accordance with the law.

Court Disposition

application allowed in terms of prayer No. 2; garnishee to show cause

Orders

  • The garnishee is ordered to attend court on a date to be fixed to show cause why it should not pay the decree holders the amount held in the specified account in satisfaction of the decree.
  • The applicant to serve the application for interpartes hearing on 30th November, 2009.