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

Dorothy Margaret Wanjiku Kung’u v Akash Himatlal Dodhia & another [2021] KECA 1034 (KLR)

[2021] KECA 1034 (KLR) Court of Appeal
Read PDF
Court
Court of Appeal
Case number
1034
Citation
[2021] KECA 1034 (KLR)
Decided
29 January 2021
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeCivil AppealPostureAppeal from a judgment of the Environment and Land CourtCoramHANNAH OKWENGU, D.K. MUSINGA, F. SICHALE
Holding

We find this appeal lacking in merit and dismiss it with costs to the 1st respondent.

Facts

The appellant, Dorothy Margaret Wanjiku Kung’u, is the executrix of her late husband’s estate. She entered into a sale agreement with the 1st respondent, Akash Himatlal Dodhia, for the sale of a property (L.R. No. 7741/442) which forms part of the deceased’s estate. The appellant did not complete the sale transaction, leading to a suit filed by the 1st respondent.

Issues

  1. Whether the learned judge erred in law in holding that the appellant had capacity to enter into the sale agreement with the 1st respondent and finding that they were clear on the subject matter of the agreement.
  2. Whether the learned judge erred in law in holding that the appellant was in breach of the sale agreement.
  3. Whether the learned judge erred in law in ordering specific performance of the contract of sale.

Reasoning

The court held that the contract was capable of performance and that specific performance was enforceable. The appellant’s argument against specific performance was dismissed.

Outcome

Appeal dismissed with costs to the 1st respondent.

Authorities cited

Cases cited (2)
  • Gitanga Mwaniki v. Annuncita Waithira Kibue [2013] eKLR
  • Gharib Suleiman Gharib v Abdulrahman Mohamed Agil LLR No. 750 (CAK) Civil Appeal No. 112 of 1998
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