Wanyonyi v Namasaka (Civil Case E051 of 2025) [2026] KEMC 630 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Bungoma court cut a Kshs. 80,000/= debt claim to Kshs. 60,000/=, ruling the lender had quietly received Kshs. 20,000/= in partial repayment.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the Defendant owed Kshs. 80,000/= or only Kshs. 60,000/=
The Defendant owed only Kshs. 60,000/=; the Plaintiff dishonestly denied receiving Kshs. 20,000/= in partial settlement conveyed through IP Kemunto and PW2
The Plaintiff's testimony shifted repeatedly on how much was owed and whether she had received payments. Guided by the authority on repugnant and inconsistent statements, and having observed her demeanour and noted she remembered the circumstances well, the court attributed the inconsistencies to dishonesty rather than carelessness or uncertain memory. PW2 testified credibly that she passed on Kshs. 6,000/= received from the Defendant towards the debt.
Whether payment should be made by installments
The court ordered installments of Kshs. 10,000/= per month, notwithstanding that the Defendant had not strictly satisfied the Rajabali Alidina conditions, because the loan agreement itself showed she had voluntarily committed to such installments
The Defendant's own proposal of Kshs. 1,000/= (later Kshs. 500/=) monthly was unreasonable. Although she led no credible evidence on her financial position and had not paid anything since suit was filed, the court took judicial notice of the harsh economic times and relied on the loan agreement in which she had voluntarily committed to monthly installments of Kshs. 10,000/= as proof of her capacity. Default entitles the Plaintiff to execute for the full sum.
Whether interest should be levied on the debt
No interest awarded; the loan agreement contained no interest clause
The court perused the undated loan agreement and found it contained no clause on interest. Applying the general rule that a court cannot rewrite agreements voluntarily executed by parties, it declined to imply an interest obligation the parties never agreed to.
Who should bear the costs of the suit
The Defendant to pay the Plaintiff's costs, assessed at Kshs. 10,000/=
The suit was filed only because the Defendant failed to honour the loan agreement; had she honoured it or settled out of court, the Plaintiff would not have incurred litigation expenses. It was therefore just and fair that the Defendant pay reasonable costs, which the court quantified at Kshs. 10,000/=.
Legal principles established
#- A witness who makes inconsistent and repugnant statements is untrustworthy, whether through carelessness, uncertain memory or dishonesty
- The court's discretion under Order 21 Rule 12(2) of the Civil Procedure Rules to order payment by installments must be exercised judiciously, considering the circumstances of the debt, the debtor's conduct, financial position and bona fides
- A court cannot rewrite agreements voluntarily executed by parties; absent an interest clause, no contractual interest may be awarded
Court orders
#- 1.Judgment entered against the Defendant for the sum of Kshs. 60,000/=
- 2.The Defendant ordered to settle the sum through equal monthly installments of Kshs. 10,000/=, the first due on 28th February 2026 and the remaining installments on or before the last date of the succeeding months until full payment
- 3.In the event of default in any installment, the Plaintiff at liberty to commence execution proceedings for recovery of the outstanding sum in full
- 4.Costs of the suit awarded to the Plaintiff, assessed at Kshs. 10,000/=
- 5.The Certificate of Costs and Decree to issue upon payment of the requisite court fees
- 6.The file closed
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Original civil jurisdiction of the magistrates' court over the money claim under the Civil Procedure Act and Civil Procedure Rules; not expressly stated in the judgment
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Wanyonyi v Namasaka (Civil Case E051 of 2025) [2026] KEMC 630 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2026). Civil Case No E051 of 2025. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kemc/2026/630/eng@2026-02-19
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.