[2022] KEHC 17211 (KLR)
The court found that the Plaintiff had demonstrated good faith by making substantial payments towards the decretal sum and had moved the court for extension before the expiry of the six-month period. In the interest of justice, the court held that the Plaintiff's application for extension of time should be...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2022] KEHC 17211 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Trustees of Maximum Miracle Centre; Defendant: Equity Bank (K) Limited
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Commercial Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Commercial Case E055 of 2021
- Procedural Posture
- Commercial Case / Ruling on Application to Extend Time for Payment and Maintain Status Quo
- Outcome
- Status quo maintained; execution stayed pending determination of Plaintiff's application.
- Judges
- DO Chepkwony
- Legal Topics
- Extension of Time, Injunctive Orders, Debt Recovery, Status Quo Orders
- 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
Trustees of Maximum Miracle Centre
Plaintiff
Equity Bank (K) Limited
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Commercial Case / Ruling on Application to Extend Time for Payment and Maintain Status Quo
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the Plaintiff is entitled to an extension of time to pay the decretal sum as previously ordered by the court.
- 2 Whether the court should maintain the status quo and restrain execution pending determination of the Plaintiff's application on merit.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the Plaintiff had demonstrated good faith by making substantial payments towards the decretal sum and had moved the court for extension before the expiry of the six-month period. In the interest of justice, the court held that the Plaintiff's application for extension of time should be considered on its merits without the threat of execution. Consequently, the court directed that the prevailing status quo be maintained pending the determination of the Plaintiff's application, thereby restraining the Defendant from proceeding with execution until the application is heard and determined.
Court Disposition
Status quo maintained; execution stayed pending determination of Plaintiff's application.
Orders
- The prevailing status quo shall be maintained pending the determination of the Plaintiff’s application dated May 6, 2022 on merit.
- The court will rely on the parties' written submissions as filed; no further oral highlighting will be permitted.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
22 paragraphs
Trustees of Maximum Miracle Centre v Equity Bank (K) Limited (Commercial Case E055 of 2021) [2022] KEHC 17211 (KLR) (Commercial and Tax) (15 November 2022) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2022] KEHC 17211 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Commercial Courts Commercial and Tax Division)
Commercial and Tax
Commercial Case E055 of 2021
DO Chepkwony, J
November 15, 2022
Between
Trustees of Maximum Miracle Centre
Plaintiff
and
Equity Bank (K) Limited
Defendant
Ruling
1. This matter came up for mention for parties to confirm filing of submissions with respect to the Plaintiff’s Notice of Motion application dated May 6, 2022 which substantially seeks the court’s indulgence to extend time within which to pay the sum of Kshs.27,903,260. 50 as directed in a ruling dated 11th November, 2021 by an additional 90 days. Both parties confirmed having filed their submissions. And while Mr. Mbayi wanted to rely on his submissions and take a date for ruling, Mr. Kamau expressed the desire to highlight her submissions. She has then requested for a date to do so and for an extension of the subsisting interim orders, taking into account that the Respondent had served them with a Notification for sale dated 1st November, 2022. She has gone on to add that the Applicant has shown good will by paying Kshs.14,880,000/= out of the Kshs.27,903,260. 50, as directed by the court on November 11, 2021 and was even ready to deposit a further Kshs.5,000,000/= by close of business the following day.
2. Mr. Mbayi, counsel for the Respondent responded by arguing that there were no interim orders in place since the court had directed in its ruling dated November 11, 2021, that the Plaintiff pays the sum of Kshs.27,903,260. 50 within six (6) months of the ruling failing to which the injunctive orders would lapse. Thus since six (6) months have lapsed, counting from the date of the ruling, there are no interim orders in place to extend.
3. In my view, six (6) months lapsed on May 11, 2022 counting from the date of ruling which was on November 11, 2021. The applications seeking extension of the orders was made on May 6, 2022.
4. In view of all the above, I am satisfied that the Plaintiff moved the court aptly and had demonstrated a good-will by making some sufficient payment towards the amount owed. I believe, it would be in the interest of justice that they are given a chance for their application dated May 6, 2022 to be considered on merit without the anxiety and fear of facing execution by the Respondent.
5. Having said that, this court directs that the prevailing status quo bemaintained pending the determination of the Plaintiff’s application dated May 6, 2022 on merit.
6. I have also taken into consideration the nature of prayers that have been sought for in the application and since parties have filed their respective submissions, the same are not so technical as to require counsel to want for a chance to highlight the same in two months. It would be in the interest of justice for the court to rely on the parties submissions as filed.
RULING DELIVERED VIRTUALLY, DATED AND SIGNED AT NAIROBI THIS 15TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2022. D. O. CHEPKWONYJUDGEIn the presence of:Mrs. Kamau holding brief for Mr. Kyalo for PlaintiffMr. Mbayi counsel for DefendantCourt Assistant - Sakina