[2000] KEHC 484 (KLR)
The court found that the defendant failed to provide any credible or substantive defence to the plaintiff's claim for recovery of the loan amount. The purported defence was deemed a sham, intended solely to delay the plaintiffs. Applying the principle that a mere denial is insufficient and that a defendant must show...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2000] KEHC 484 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Rajay Singh; Plaintiff: Rajay Singh & Another; Defendant: Ravi Amin
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- ? 1178 of 1999
- Procedural Posture
- Summary Judgment Application / Judgment
- Outcome
- summary judgment entered for the plaintiff for Kshs 1.5 million; claim for Kshs 250,000 to proceed to trial
- Legal Topics
- Summary Judgment, Loan Recovery, Defences to Debt Claims
- 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
Rajay Singh
Plaintiff
Rajay Singh & Another
Plaintiff
Ravi Amin
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Summary Judgment Application / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the defendant has raised a triable issue or a bona fide defence to the plaintiff's claim for recovery of a loan amount.
- 2 Whether summary judgment should be entered in favour of the plaintiff under Order 35 of the Civil Procedure Rules.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the defendant failed to provide any credible or substantive defence to the plaintiff's claim for recovery of the loan amount. The purported defence was deemed a sham, intended solely to delay the plaintiffs. Applying the principle that a mere denial is insufficient and that a defendant must show a good defence, the court held that summary judgment was appropriate. The court therefore entered summary judgment for the plaintiff for Kshs 1.5 million, with costs and interest, while the claim for the balance of Kshs 250,000 was to proceed to trial.
Court Disposition
summary judgment entered for the plaintiff for Kshs 1.5 million; claim for Kshs 250,000 to proceed to trial
Orders
- Summary judgment is entered for the plaintiff against the defendant for Kshs 1.5 million together with costs and interest.
- The claim in respect of the balance of Kshs 250,000 will proceed to trial.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
6 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
RAJAY SINGH & ANOTHER VRAVI AMIN High Court Of Kenya At Nairobi August 7, 2000. Milimani Commercial Courts T Mbaluto, Judge Civil Case No. 1178 Of 1999
August 7, 2000 T Mbaluto, Judge delivered the following judgment
This is an application for summary judgment under Order 35 of the Civil Procedure Rules. It is supported by an affidavit sworn on February 21, 2000 by Rajay Singh the 1st plaintiff who is also a director of the 2nd plaintiff. The affidavit clearly shows that the defendant requested for and was granted a loan by the 2nd plaintiff in the sum of Kshs 1. 5 million. Payment was vide a cheque No. CA 128355 from Account No. 103-17345-01 drawn on Standard Chartered Bank. That cheque was presented for payment and duly honoured through special clearance. Receipt of the money is in fact acknowledged but the defendant who however purports to deny the claim by stating that the cheque is deemed to have been given for good consideration.
I do not understand what that means and anyway, I do not think it is either a reasonable or good defence in the circumstances. In a further attempts to explain the matter, the defendant has tendered as evidence an unsigned letter which is clearly a fake. In the case of Magunga General Stores v Pepco Distrib utors Limited , (Court of Appeal, Civil Appeal No. 24 of 1986) the Court of Appeal stated:- “A mere denial is not a sufficient defence and a defendant has to show either by affidavit, oral evidence, or otherwise, that there is a good defence.”
In this case the defendant has not shown by any type of evidence that there is a good defence. In my view what the defendant has presented as a defence is a mere sham solely intended to delay the plaintiffs in the recovery of the debt. Accordingly, I enter summary judgment for the plaintiff against the defendant for Shs.1. 5 million together with costs and interest. The claim in respect of the balance i.e. Kshs 250,000 will proceed to trial. Costs of the application to the plaintiff.