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

Peter Adams Ludava v Housing Finance Company of Kenya (Ltd) [2014] KEHC 1905 (KLR)

[2014] KEHC 1905 (KLR) High Court of Kenya
Read PDF
Court
High Court of Kenya
Case number
1905
Citation
[2014] KEHC 1905 (KLR)
Decided
6 November 2014
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeCivil SuitPostureAppeal from an order granting an interlocutory injunction and striking out a notice of motionCoramKasango
Holding

The interlocutory injunction granted in 2006 lapsed due to the provisions of Order 40 Rule 6 of the Civil Procedure Rules 2010, and the sale of the charged property was in breach of the injunction.

Facts

Plaintiff filed a suit seeking a permanent injunction, declaration, and release of title documents. The case was previously heard and an interlocutory injunction was granted. The Defendant advertised and sold the charged property, leading to a new application for an injunction.

Issues

  1. Interpretation of the Civil Procedure Rules 2010
  2. Effect of the interlocutory injunction granted in 2006

Reasoning

The court found that the one-year period for the injunction to subsist began from 17th December 2010, and the sale of the property was within that period. The service of the notification of sale before the one-year period expired was in breach of the injunction.

Outcome

The scheduled sale of the property was cancelled, and the case was adjourned for further hearing.

Orders

  • Order to cancel the scheduled sale of the property
  • Order to reinstate the status quo and set down for further hearing

Remedies

  • Reinstatement of the status quo
  • Further hearing of the suit

Authorities cited

Legislation (2)
  • Civil Procedure Rules 2010
  • Auctioneer's Rules 1997
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 0.1 MB · PDF

Loading judgment…

Cite this case


        
        
      

Share this case