[2002] KEHC 776 (KLR)

[2002] KEHC 776 (KLR)

The court found that the Plaintiff's claim was for a liquidated sum arising from a hire purchase agreement, and that the 1st Defendant had defaulted on payments, leaving an outstanding balance. The 1st Defendant, despite being served, failed to appear or present any evidence or affidavit to demonstrate a reasonable...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2002] KEHC 776 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: National Industrial Credit Bank Ltd.; Defendant: Paul Kipngetich Kirui; Defendant: Bhogals Garage Limited
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Case 1356 of 2001
Procedural Posture
Civil Case / Ruling on Chamber Summons for Summary Judgment
Outcome
summary judgment entered for the plaintiff against the 1st defendant
Judges
JL Osiemo
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment, Hire Purchase Agreements, Liquidated Claims, Defence Striking Out
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Commercial and Corporate Summary Judgment Hire Purchase Agreements Liquidated Claims Defence Striking Out

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 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

National Industrial Credit Bank Ltd.

Plaintiff

Paul Kipngetich Kirui

Defendant

Bhogals Garage Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Case / Ruling on Chamber Summons for Summary Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the 1st Defendant's defence should be struck out as a sham and summary judgment entered for the Plaintiff.
  2. 2 Whether the Plaintiff's claim is a liquidated claim entitling it to summary judgment under Order 35 of the Civil Procedure Rules.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the Plaintiff's claim was for a liquidated sum arising from a hire purchase agreement, and that the 1st Defendant had defaulted on payments, leaving an outstanding balance. The 1st Defendant, despite being served, failed to appear or present any evidence or affidavit to demonstrate a reasonable ground of defence or raise a triable issue. The court held that Order 35 of the Civil Procedure Rules is designed to allow a plaintiff with a clear liquidated claim and no genuine defence to obtain summary judgment without unnecessary delay. Since the Defendant did not meet the threshold to resist summary judgment, the court concluded that the Plaintiff was entitled to judgment...

Court Disposition

summary judgment entered for the plaintiff against the 1st defendant

Orders

  • Summary judgment is entered for the Plaintiff against the 1st Defendant in the sum of Shs.1,158,301.00 with costs and interest.
  • The application against the 2nd Defendant is withdrawn with costs.