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

Resort Limited v Credit Bank Limited & another [2021] KEHC 1959 (KLR)

[2021] KEHC 1959 (KLR) High Court of Kenya
Read PDF
Court
High Court of Kenya
Case number
1959
Citation
[2021] KEHC 1959 (KLR)
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeCivilPostureAppeal from a decision of the High Court of Kenya at Nyeri
Holding

The court finds that the plaintiff is entitled to a permanent injunction against the defendants not to sell the security.

Facts

The plaintiff, Lolldaiaga Country Homes & Golf Resort Limited, seeks a permanent injunction against the defendants, Credit Bank Limited and Leakey Auctioneers, not to sell the security. The defendants argue that the suit should be struck out due to non-compliance with Order 4 Rule 1(4) of the Civil Procedure Rules.

Issues

  1. Whether the plaintiff is entitled to a permanent injunction against the defendants not to sell the security.
  2. Whether the intended sale ought to be declared null and void.
  3. Who bears the costs of the suit.

Reasoning

The court addresses the defendants' contention that the suit should be struck out due to non-compliance with Order 4 Rule 1(4) of the Civil Procedure Rules. It is held that the mere failure to file the resolution of the company together with the plaint does not invalidate the suit.

Outcome

The plaintiff is entitled to a permanent injunction against the defendants not to sell the security.

Orders

  • A permanent injunction against the defendants not to sell the security

Authorities cited

Legislation (1)
  • Civil Procedure Rules
Cases cited (2)
  • Leo Investments Ltd vs Trident Insurance Company (2014) eKLR
  • Republic vs Registrar General and Others (2005) eKLR
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