Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Caselaw
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCPartially AllowedNot stated in the judgment (application dated 7/4/2018, filed 10/4/2018)· [2019] KEELC 2427 (KLR)

Pramukh Cash and Carry Limited v Martha Adida Mbindah & another [2019] KEELC 2427 (KLR)

High Court of Kenya
17 July 2019
AKA. K. Kaniaru
1,293 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~5 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The Applicant, Pramukh Cash and Carry Limited, a tenant on Plot L.R. No. 7983/117/4118, moved the court by notice of motion under Order 51 Rule 1 and Order 40 Rules 1, 2 and 4 of the Civil Procedure Rules, seeking an injunction against the Respondents – daughters of its deceased landlord, Gabriel P. Mbindah – a declaration that a Notice of Proclamation dated 23/3/2018 was null and void, an order for deposit of rent pending determination of entitlement, and costs. The dispute arose from sibling rivalry: the 2nd Respondent collected three months' rent (Kshs.420,000) under a family arrangement, while the 1st Respondent claimed entitlement under her father's will and distrained for rent. Both Respondents filed replying affidavits and written submissions; the will is contested in High Court Succession Application No. 115 of 2017, Nairobi. The court held the Applicant was a mere tenant with no claim over the estate, entitled to protection from competing beneficiary claims, and granted the injunction (prayer 3). Since no succession cause was pending locally, it directed that rent be paid into the former Barclays Bank – Busia account (prayer 5). Prayer 4 was refused as premature, being a variant of prayer (b) in the plaint, to await trial. Costs were awarded to the Applicant. Judgment delivered at Busia on 17 July 2019.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether to grant a temporary injunction protecting the tenant

Holding

Injunction granted as prayed to protect the Applicant from rent-related wrangles over the deceased's estate

Reasoning

The court found the Applicant a mere tenant with no claim over the deceased landlord's estate, willing to pay rent but needing clarity and protection from competing beneficiary claims. An injunctive order would shield it from harassment and disputes over management or distribution of the estate pending trial.

p. 2
02

Where rent should be paid pending determination of entitlement

Holding

Rent to be paid into the former account, No. 08810771126 at Barclays Bank – Busia

Reasoning

The court noted there was no succession case pending before it in which rent could be deposited in court; the estate dispute (including a contested will) was before the High Court, Nairobi. Absent a local succession cause, the fair alternative was restoration of the pre-existing payment arrangement.

p. 2

Legal principles established

#
  • A tenant is entitled to protection from harassment arising from competing claims by beneficiaries of a deceased landlord's estate, and the court may direct where rent is to be paid pending resolution of the dispute

Court orders

#
  1. 1.Temporary injunction granted restraining the Respondents, their servants, agents and auctioneers from carting away the Plaintiff's properties from L.R. No. 7983/117/4118, interfering with its peaceful tenancy or attempting to evict it, pending the hearing of the suit
  2. 2.The Applicant ordered to be paying rent into account number 08810771126 at Barclays Bank – Busia, the account in which payment was made before the new arrangement
  3. 3.Prayer 4 (declaration that the Notice of Proclamation is null and void) refused and remitted to the trial of the action
  4. 4.Costs of the application awarded to the Applicant

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Civil Procedure RulesOrder 51 Rule 1
  • Civil Procedure RulesOrder 40 Rules 1, 2 and 4
Jurisdiction invoked
Order 51 Rule 1 and Order 40 Rules 1, 2 and 4 of the Civil Procedure Rules and all other enabling provisions of law

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Pramukh Cash and Carry Limited v Martha Adida Mbindah & another [2019] KEELC 2427 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2019). Not stated in the judgment (application dated 7/4/2018, filed 10/4/2018). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2019/2427/eng@2019-07-17

Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.