Maina v Kenya National Highway Authority & 3 others; Safaricom Kenya Plc (Garnishee) (Environment and Land Case 650 of 2017) [2026] KEELC 1970 (KLR)
The bottom line
#The High Court ordered Safaricom to pay only the Kshs. 36,868.62 actually held in the judgment-debtor's M-PESA wallet, not the larger sum allegedly withdrawn.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the garnishee order nisi should be made absolute against the M-PESA balance
The order nisi was made absolute but only for the balance of Kshs. 36,868.62 actually held by the Garnishee
The court considered Order 23 rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Rules and the object of garnishee proceedings. The Garnishee filed an affidavit confirming the M-PESA line was registered to the Plaintiff and that it was able to release only the available balance of Kshs. 36,868.62 in partial settlement. Although the 1st Defendant sought to hold the Garnishee liable for Kshs. 151,442 allegedly withdrawn after service of the order nisi, the court, associating itself with the cited decisions, limited the decree-holder to the amount shown in the M-PESA statement in the Garnishee's custody.
Legal principles established
#- The object of garnishee proceedings is to enable a decree-holder to reach a debt due to the judgment-debtor from the garnishee sufficient to satisfy the decree, and crucial to such proceedings is that the garnishee is indebted to the judgment-debtor
- A garnishee who willfully allows withdrawals of funds after service of an order nisi is culpable to the extent of such withdrawals
Court orders
#- 1.That the Garnishee Order Nisi be and is hereby made absolute
- 2.That the Garnishee be and is hereby directed to pay to the 1st Defendant Kshs. 36,868.62 which is in the M-PESA line bearing the Number +254 725 936 441, registered to the Plaintiff
- 3.That the costs of this application and that of the Garnishee be borne by the Plaintiff
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Order 23 of the Civil Procedure Rules (garnishee proceedings)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Maina v Kenya National Highway Authority & 3 others; Safaricom Kenya Plc (Garnishee) (Environment and Land Case 650 of 2017) [2026] KEELC 1970 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2026). Not stated in judgment (1st Defendant's Notice of Motion dated 14th November 2024). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/1970/eng@2026-04-13
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.