[2020] KEHC 6317 (KLR)
The court found that, in the absence of any response or rebuttal from the 2nd defendant to the plaintiff's evidence and explanation regarding the rent payments and the confusion over the bank account details, it could not determine that the plaintiff was wilfully in default of the conditions for stay of execution....
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2020] KEHC 6317 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Paul Karuga Njuguna; Defendant: Housing Finance Company of Kenya Limited; Defendant: Peninah Njeri Hassan
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Commercial Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Civil Suit 506 of 2008
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Suit / Ruling on Notice of Motion for Eviction Post Judgment
- Outcome
- Application for eviction disallowed; liberty to reapply in case of future default; no order as to costs.
- Judges
- MM Kasango
- Legal Topics
- Eviction Proceedings, Stay of Execution, Compliance With Court Orders, Arrears of Rent
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Paul Karuga Njuguna
Plaintiff
Housing Finance Company of Kenya Limited
Defendant
Peninah Njeri Hassan
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Civil Suit / Ruling on Notice of Motion for Eviction Post Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the plaintiff was in wilful default of the conditions for stay of execution as ordered by the court.
- 2 Whether the 2nd defendant is entitled to an order for eviction of the plaintiff based on alleged rent arrears.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that, in the absence of any response or rebuttal from the 2nd defendant to the plaintiff's evidence and explanation regarding the rent payments and the confusion over the bank account details, it could not determine that the plaintiff was wilfully in default of the conditions for stay of execution. The evidentiary burden to prove default was not discharged by the 2nd defendant. Consequently, the application for eviction was disallowed, but the 2nd defendant was granted liberty to seek eviction in the event of future default by the plaintiff.
Court Disposition
Application for eviction disallowed; liberty to reapply in case of future default; no order as to costs.
Orders
- The Notice of Motion dated 11th March 2019 is disallowed.
- Leave is granted to the 2nd defendant to file for eviction in case of future default of the condition of stay.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
28 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA
AT NAIROBI
COMMERCIAL AND ADMIRALTY DIVISION
CIVIL SUIT NO. 506 OF 2008
PAUL KARUGA NJUGUNA..................................................................PLAINTIFF
- VERSUS -
HOUSING FINANCE COMPANY OF KENYA LIMITED......1ST DEFENDANT
PENINAH NJERI HASSAN.........................................................2ND DEFENDANT
RULING
1. Judgment was delivered, in this matter, on 18th August 2016. By that judgment the court dismissed the plaintiff’s case and ordered the plaintiff to be evicted from property LR No DANGORETTI/RIRUTA/S/272. That property is registered in 2nd defendant’s name.
2. The plaintiff sought stay of execution of that judgment pending appeal. The court by the Ruling of 16th February 2017 granted the plaintiff conditional stay of execution. Stay was granted on condition the plaintiff does pays Ksh 50,000 rent on the 5th day of each month and in event of default execution to issue.
3. The 2nd defendant has moved this court by Notice of Motion application dated 11th March 2019. The 2nd defendant seeks by that application the eviction of the plaintiff. The 2nd defendant by her affidavit in support of the application alleges that the plaintiff is in arrears of rent by the amount of Ksh 450,000. 00. That the plaintiff has continually failed to obey the conditions of stay of execution which is prejudicial to the 2nd defendant.
4. The plaintiff by his replying affidavit dated 26th April 2019 deponed that he had attended Equity Bank to deposit his rent into the bank account given by the 2nd defendant but was informed that the account was in the name of Dr. Adeyemi Frank Attere. This prompted his advocate to write to the 2nd defendant’s advocate, by letter dated 9th April 2019, and informed the said advocate that the bank account supplied to the plaintiff did not belong to the 2nd defendant. Since that letter did not get a response his advocate wrote another letter dated 6th June 2019 making the same inquiry. The plaintiff gave that as the reason for failure to pay rent when due.
5. By a further affidavit of the plaintiff sworn on 25th July 2019 the plaintiff attached banking slip of the rent due which was deposited in the bank account given to him by the 2nd defendant, which he said he later found out it was a joint account of 2nd defendant and DR. Adeyemi Frank Attere. The plaintiff deponed that he was upto date with his rental payments.
6. Unfortunately there was no response from the 2nd defendant to the plaintiff’s deposition that he was unable to deposit his rent into the bank account supplied by 2nd defendant because it was in another person’s name nor was there response to the deposition that the plaintiff is upto date with his rental payments.
7. In the light of the above I am unable to determine whether the plaintiff was wilfully in default of the conditions for stay. Accordingly I am unable to accede to the 2nd defendant’s application. Although I am unable to grant the prayers sought the 2nd defendant will not be barred to seek the plaintiff’s eviction in case of any future default.
CONCLUSION
8. I grant the following orders:
a. The Notice of Motion dated 11th March 2019 for the reason set out above is disallowed. Leave is however granted to the 2nd defendant to file for the eviction of the plaintiff in case of future default of condition of stay.
b. There shall be no order as to costs to Notice of Motion dated 11th March 2019.
DATED, SIGNED and DELIVERED at NAIROBI this27thday of APRIL,2020.
MARY KASANGO
JUDGE
ORDER
In view of the measures restricting court operations due to the COVID-19 pandemic and in light of the Gazette Notice No 3137 of 17th April 2020 and further parties having been notified of the virtual delivery of this decision, this decision is hereby virtually delivered this 27th day of April, 2020.
MARY KASANGO
JUDGE