SheriaNet for Android — search and read Kenyan case law from your phone, offline.
Join the beta →

Maithene Malindi Enterprises Limited v Kaniki Karisa Kaniki & 2 others [2018] KECA 768 (KLR)

[2018] KECA 768 (KLR) Court of Appeal
Read PDF
Court
Court of Appeal
Case number
768
Citation
[2018] KECA 768 (KLR)
Decided
8 February 2018
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeCivil AppealPostureAppeal from the judgment of the High Court at MalindiCoramP.N WAKI, JUDGE OF APPEAL, W. KARANJA, JUDGE OF APPEAL, M.K.KOOME, JUDGE OF APPEAL
Holding

The appeal and cross appeal succeed, and the judgment of the High Court is set aside. The 1st respondent's suit is dismissed with costs.

Facts

In 1995, Commercial Bank Limited advanced a loan of Kshs.2,500,000 to Kaniki Karisa Kaniki, secured by a mortgage. In 1999, the bank and Giro Commercial Bank merged, and Kaniki Karisa Kaniki defaulted on payments. The bank filed a suit for recovery, which was set aside. In 2005, the bank sold the property to the appellant, who subsequently challenged the sale.

Issues

  1. Validity of the sale of the property
  2. Validity of the mortgage

Reasoning

The court found the sale of the property to be valid and the mortgage to be valid, as the 1st respondent had received benefits under the mortgage and could not challenge its validity.

Outcome

Appeal successful, judgment of the High Court set aside

Orders

  • The 1st respondent's suit is dismissed with costs

Remedies

  • The 1st respondent's suit is dismissed with costs

Authorities cited

Legislation (2)
  • Section 69B (2)(b) of the ITPA
  • Transfer of Property Act, 1925 (England)
Cases cited (3)
  • Mwaniki wa Ndegwa vs. National Bank of Kenya Ltd & Another [2016] eKLR
  • Noorbegum Fazal (suing as a holder of power of attorney in favour of Nadra Hussein Fazal) vs. Diamond Trust Bank [2015] eKLR
  • Lord Waring vs. London and Manchester Co. Ltd. [1935] Ch 310
Experimental AI summary generated by a language model, not a lawyer. It may contain errors or omissions and must not be relied on for legal decisions — the full judgment below is the authoritative source.
Full judgment 0.2 MB · PDF

Loading judgment…

Cite this case


        
        
      

Share this case