[2025] KEHC 5833 (KLR)

[2025] KEHC 5833 (KLR)

The court found that the applicant had fully complied with the consent order by depositing the required sum of Kshs. 150,000 with the Deputy Registrar, as confirmed by the court record and a letter from the Deputy Registrar to the police. The 2nd creditor’s continued pursuit of the applicant, including seeking...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2025] KEHC 5833 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Zaki Abdulrahman Said; Respondent: Abubakar AH Mohamed; Respondent: Amosa K Limited; Applicant: Ahmed Mohamed Said
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Malindi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Judgment Date
9 May 2025
Case Number
Bankruptcy Cause 1 of 2010
Procedural Posture
Bankruptcy Cause / Ruling on Notice of Motion to Discharge Warrant of Seizure and Close File
Outcome
application allowed
Judges
M Thande
Legal Topics
Bankruptcy Proceedings, Warrant of Seizure, Consent Orders, Settlement of Debt
Source Language
english
Civil Procedure Banking and Finance Bankruptcy Proceedings Warrant of Seizure Consent Orders Settlement of Debt

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Zaki Abdulrahman Said

Applicant

Abubakar AH Mohamed

Respondent

Amosa K Limited

Respondent

Ahmed Mohamed Said

Applicant

Procedural Posture

Bankruptcy Cause / Ruling on Notice of Motion to Discharge Warrant of Seizure and Close File

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant has fully settled the debt owed to the 2nd creditor as per the consent order.
  2. 2 Whether the warrant of seizure issued against the applicant should be discharged and set aside.
  3. 3 Whether the bankruptcy cause/file should be marked as closed.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant had fully complied with the consent order by depositing the required sum of Kshs. 150,000 with the Deputy Registrar, as confirmed by the court record and a letter from the Deputy Registrar to the police. The 2nd creditor’s continued pursuit of the applicant, including seeking seizure warrants, was unjustified given the full settlement of the debt. The 2nd creditor’s inconsistent positions—claiming the consent was forged while simultaneously seeking release of the deposited funds—were untenable. The court held that the consent order was binding, the debt was settled, and there was no basis for any warrant of seizure to remain in force. Accordingly, the...

Court Disposition

application allowed

Orders

  • The warrant of seizure issued against the applicant is discharged and set aside.
  • The costs of the applicant shall be borne by the 2nd creditor.