https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2026/7610

Ngaywa and Kibet Partners LLP v Monarch Insurance Company Limited & 3 others (Miscellaneous Civil Case E048 of 2023) [2026] KEHC 7610 (KLR) (29 May 2026) (Ruling) Neutral citation: [2026] KEHC 7610 (KLR) Republic of Kenya In the High Court at Makueni Miscellaneous Civil Case E048 of 2023 JN Onyiego, J May 29, 2026 Between Ngaywa and Kibet Partners LLP Decree holder and Monarch Insurance Company Limited Judgment debtor and Ecobank Kenya Limited 1st Garnishee National Bank Of Kenya 2nd Garnishee Maisha Micro Finance Bank 3rd Garnishee Ruling 1.Vide a Notice of Motion dated 13-3-2026, the applicant/decree holder sought garnishee order nisi against the garnishees seeking them to show cause why they should not attach the respondent’s accounts held in their respective accounts to satisfy the decree of Kshs. 291,613 owed to the applicant by the respondent/ Judgment Debtor. They also sought for costs of the application and that the garnishee order nisi be made absolute. 2.The application is supported by the affidavit sworn by Moses Ngaywa who averred that the respondent has an Account Number 6640xxxxxx held by the 1st garnishee at Westlands; A/c Numbers 01020xxxxxxxxx and 010200xxxxxxxx held by the 2nd garnishee and 0012500xxxxx held the 3rd garnishee. 3.The 1st garnishee filed a replying affidavit sworn by Benson Omondi Assistant and Operations Manager Ecobank Westlands Branch sworn on 30-4-2026. He admitted that the respondent has the said account with them and that the balance in the subject account as at 27-3-2026 was Kshs.58,877. That there are several other earlier holds served upon them in respect of the same account from several courts against the same judgment debtor hence insufficient funds to honour the order. They sought to be discharged. He listed (a-p) the number of holds in the que seeking to attach same account. 4.The second garnishee equally responded vide a replying affidavit sworn by Daniel Mwaniki Relations Manager who admitted that the respondent indeed holds two accounts with them as listed by the applicant but the same have only a accumulative amount of Kshs.542,325/= which already have been encumbered by several other holds issued by various courts in the country. He attached documentation to prove that there are earlier holds which rank first in priority in settlement. 5.The respondent and 3rd garnishee did not file response. 6.During the hearing parties basically adopted and restated the content in their respective affidavits. 7.I have considered the application herein and the response thereof. There is no dispute that the applicant has a valid decree which is yet to be satisfied. It is upon the applicant to show that the garnishee owes or holds funds belonging to the judgment debtor which money can be used to settle the claim. On the other hand, the garnishees have a duty to satisfy the court that they have or they don’t have such sufficient funds to honour the payment. 8.The 1st and 2nd garnishees have demonstrated that the respondents are their clients holding accounts in their organizations. However, they are claiming that the money is not enough and even then, there are similar orders served upon them by various courts against the same debtor. They attached evidence to show that indeed such holds does exist. In my view, the 1st and 2nd garnishees have discharged their duty that they don’t have sufficient funds to honour the claim. Secondly, they have demonstrated that even if they are enough, the 1st holds would have to be satisfied first. For those reasons, the 1st and the 2nd garnishees are discharged and the garnishee order nisi against them lifted with costs assessed at Kshs. 50,000/= awarded against the respondent for each garnishee. 9.However, the 3rd garnishee (Maisha Micro Finance Bank) having failed to respond and show cause why they should not honour the claim, the assumption is that they have enough funds to satisfy the claim. Accordingly, the garnishee order nisi against the 3rd garnishee is declared absolute and the 3rd garnishee is directed to attach a sum of Kshs. 291,613 from the respondent’s aforesaid account. Costs shall follow the event in favour of the applicant. DATED SIGNED AND DELIVERED VIRTUALLY THIS 29TH DAY MAY 2026..........................J.N.ONYIEGOJUDGE