Mukenya Ndunda v Crater Automobiles Limited [2015] KECA 252 (KLR)

Facts

The High Court judgment was delivered on 28th September 2012 in Nairobi H.C.C.C. No.998 of 1999. The plaintiff was Kenya, Tanzania, Uganda Leasing Limited, the applicant was the 1st defendant, and the respondent/appellant was the 2nd defendant. The plaintiff claimed Shs.10,125,395/= plus costs and interest, predicated on a Hire Purchase Contract.

Issues

1. Whether the High Court erred in law and fact in holding that the respondent had proved her case against the appellant on a balance of probabilities.
2. Whether the High Court erred in law and fact in failing to consider the submissions made on behalf of the appellant.
3. Whether the High Court erred in law and fact in placing reliance on non-probative factors on the veracity of the respondent’s testimony.
4. Whether the High Court erred in law and fact in holding that the valuation reports produced by the respondent were linked to the title thereto being surrendered as security to the appellant.
5. Whether the High Court erred in law and fact in making alternative findings on unpleaded matters and in the absence of any evidence in support of such a finding.
6. Whether the High Court erred in law and fact in holding that the respondent’s title documents were in possession of the appellant without any evidential basis.
7. Whether the High Court erred in law and fact in making findings that were incongruent to the observations made in the course of the judgment.
8. Whether the High Court erred in law and fact when in the absence of any evidence, proof, legal basis and or material held that the appellant was liable to pay the respondent Ksh.300,000/= to underwrite the procurement of new title

Reasoning

The appeal was lodged out of time and the record of appeal and the supplementary record were filed out of time, thus they are incompetent.

Outcome

Appeal dismissed