https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2026/6865

https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2026/6865

The application was unopposed, the decree holder proved the existence of an unsatisfied decree, proved that the respondent owned the identified immovable property, and showed a real risk of dissipation or frustration of execution; the court therefore held that the legal conditions for a prohibitory order and...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2026] KEHC 6865 (KLR)
Parties
Advocate/decree Holder: PHILIP MUOKA & CO. ADVOCATES; Client/judgment Debtor: CIVICON LIMITED
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Miscellaneous Application E1251 of 2020
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application in Enforcement/execution of a Monetary Decree / Ruling on Notice of Motion for Prohibitory Order, Sale of Immovable Property, and Related Execution Orders
Outcome
Application allowed.
Judges
["F Gikonyo"]
Legal Topics
Prohibitory Order Over Immovable Property, Attachment and Sale of Immovable Property in Execution, Inhibition Under Land Registration Act, Execution Against Assets After Unsatisfied Judgment, Costs and Valuation in Execution
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Execution of Decrees Land Law Prohibitory Order Over Immovable Property Attachment and Sale of Immovable Property in Execution Inhibition Under Land Registration Act Execution Against Assets After Unsatisfied Judgment Costs and Valuation in Execution

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 5 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

PHILIP MUOKA & CO. ADVOCATES

Advocate/decree Holder

CIVICON LIMITED

Client/judgment Debtor

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Application in Enforcement/execution of a Monetary Decree / Ruling on Notice of Motion for Prohibitory Order, Sale of Immovable Property, and Related Execution Orders

  1. 1 Whether the application for a prohibitory order and execution against immovable property was merited
  2. 2 Whether the decree holder had shown a basis for attachment and sale of the respondent's property
  3. 3 Whether service was effected and the respondent's silence entitled the court to grant the orders sought

Ratio Decidendi

The application was unopposed, the decree holder proved the existence of an unsatisfied decree, proved that the respondent owned the identified immovable property, and showed a real risk of dissipation or frustration of execution; the court therefore held that the legal conditions for a prohibitory order and consequent execution against the property were met.

Court Disposition

Application allowed.

Orders

  • A prohibitory order issued stopping registration or any further dealings in Plot Number 1883/V/MN, City of Mombasa, registered in the respondent's name, pending further orders of the court.
  • The judgment debtor was ordered to pay the decree holder the decretal sum within 30 days, failing which the attached property was to be advertised and sold by public auction to recover Kshs. 1,650,337 with interest at 14% per annum from 23.1.2021 until payment in full and costs of Kshs. 10,000.