Muiruri t/a Mururi Auto Parts & 5 others v Kihumo Property Developers (K) Ltd (Environment and Land Case 945 of 2016) [2025] KEELC 8397 (KLR)
The bottom line
#The court refused to reopen judgment against a tenant, but corrected an inflated warrant of attachment that demanded far more than he actually owed.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the regular judgment of 28th September 2023 should be set aside to allow the 5th Plaintiff to participate
Refused. The 5th Plaintiff was represented by an advocate on record, other plaintiffs did not participate, and no affidavit from the advocate confirmed lack of instructions.
The court noted the plaintiffs jointly filed suit through one advocate, whose address for service was stated in the Plaint. The 5th Plaintiff denied knowledge but produced no affidavit from his advocate confirming he was not instructed. The court inferred he was ably represented and sought to evade his share of the decretal sum.
Whether the Decree and Warrant of Attachment should be rectified for incorrect computation of interest and costs
Allowed. The figures in the judgment, application for execution and Warrant of Attachment did not tally; the Warrant was set aside and the Decree ordered rectified.
The court found the decretal sum against the 5th Plaintiff apportioned at Kshs. 200,000 with 12% interest amounting to Kshs. 28,000, yet the Warrant of Attachment indicated Kshs. 1,023,390.65. Exercising the power under Section 99 of the Civil Procedure Act, it set aside the Warrant and directed rectification.
Legal principles established
#- A court has discretion to set aside judgment but must consider sufficient reasons proffered before doing so; a party properly served who opts not to attend court cannot blame anyone but himself
- The court may correct clerical or arithmetical mistakes in a decree under Section 99 of the Civil Procedure Act, but only where it is giving effect to the court's intention at the time of judgment
Court orders
#- 1.Prayer (4) of the Notice of Motion allowed - the Decree be rectified to correctly compute the interest and costs payable by the 5th Plaintiff
- 2.The Warrant of Attachment of Decree dated 18th March, 2025 addressed to the 5th Plaintiff set aside, to be re-issued with the correct decretal sum
- 3.Costs in the cause
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Inherent discretion to set aside judgment and Section 99 of the Civil Procedure Act (correction of decrees)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Muiruri t/a Mururi Auto Parts & 5 others v Kihumo Property Developers (K) Ltd (Environment and Land Case 945 of 2016) [2025] KEELC 8397 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Not stated in the extract. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2025/8397/eng@2025-12-03
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.