[2025] KECPT 349 (KLR)

[2025] KECPT 349 (KLR)

The Tribunal found that the claimant admitted to defaulting on the loan and had not provided sufficient reasons or evidence to justify the grant of a permanent injunction against the sale of the charged property. The property was validly used as security for the loan, and the respondents followed due process in...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2025] KECPT 349 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Dickson Mbogo Njiru; Respondent: Nawiri Sacco Society Limited; Respondent: Giant Auctioneers
Court
Cooperative Tribunal
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Tribunal Case 261/E052 of 2021
Procedural Posture
Civil Claim / Judgment
Outcome
claim dismissed with costs; grace period for payment granted by consent
Judges
Janet Mwatsama, M Chesikaw, PO Aol
Legal Topics
Permanent Injunction, Loan Default, Security Enforcement, Auction Process
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Land and Property Permanent Injunction Loan Default Security Enforcement Auction Process

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 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dickson Mbogo Njiru

Applicant

Nawiri Sacco Society Limited

Respondent

Giant Auctioneers

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Claim / Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the claimant is entitled to a permanent injunction restraining the respondents from attaching, advertising for sale, selling, alienating, or disposing of land parcel Ngandori/Kirigi/8539.
  2. 2 Whether the respondents followed due process in seeking to realize the security for the outstanding loan.

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal found that the claimant admitted to defaulting on the loan and had not provided sufficient reasons or evidence to justify the grant of a permanent injunction against the sale of the charged property. The property was validly used as security for the loan, and the respondents followed due process in issuing statutory notices and seeking to realize the security. The Tribunal emphasized that the claimant's breach of contractual obligations disentitled him to equitable relief. However, considering the parties' consent and the respondents' willingness, the Tribunal granted the claimant a grace period until December 2025 to make full payment, failing which the respondents would be...

Court Disposition

claim dismissed with costs; grace period for payment granted by consent

Orders

  • The Statement of Claim dated June 15, 2021 is dismissed with costs to the respondents.
  • The claimant is granted a grace period until December 2025 to make full payment of the outstanding loan, if at all.