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

Nahashon Njage Nyaggah v Savings & Loan Kenya Limited & another [2017] KEHC 7804 (KLR)

[2017] KEHC 7804 (KLR) High Court of Kenya
Read PDF
Court
High Court of Kenya
Case number
7804
Citation
[2017] KEHC 7804 (KLR)
Decided
17 February 2017
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeCivlitPostureAppeal from a judgment of the High Court of Kenya at NairobiCoramThe Honorable Justice
Holding

The court finds that the Charge document and the Letter of Offer are contradictory, and the Defendant did not reserve the right to vary the rate of interest freely without notice.

Facts

The Plaintiff, Nahashon Njage Nyaggah, charged his property to the Defendant, Savings & Loan Kenya Limited, to secure a loan of Kshs. 750,000. The loan was to be repaid over ten years with an agreed interest rate of 28% per annum. The Plaintiff claims he has fully discharged his obligations, but the Defendant alleges arrears and seeks to sell the property.

Issues

  1. What was the agreed rate of interest in the charge document?
  2. Could the rate of interest be varied without notice to the plaintiff?
  3. Whether there was a regulation of the chargeable interest rate by the CBK during the relevant period.
  4. Whether the defendant has clogged the plaintiff’s right to redeem his property.
  5. Whether the plaintiff is indebted to the defendant in the sum of Kshs. 1,307,668.37 or at all.
  6. Is the defendant entitled to exercise its statutory power of sale over the suit property?

Reasoning

The court determined that the agreed rate of interest was 28% per annum, which could only be varied with notice to the plaintiff. The court also found that the interest rate charged was on a simple method basis and not compounded.

Outcome

The appeal was dismissed.

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