keelc-2025-06523

WINNIE WANJIRU KARIUKI ................................................. 17TH RESPONDENT EDWARD ELVIS NDIRANGU AND ESTHER WANGARI NDIRANGU ................................................................................. 18TH RESPONDENT DEBORAH OWIRA OTIENO ................................................... 19TH RESPONDENT PAUL JAMES OTIENO ODHIAMBO ....................................... 20TH RESPONDENT BARCLAYS BANK OF KENYA LIMITED ............................... 21ST RESPONDENT JOHN MUCHANGI KARIGI .................................................... 22ND RESPONDENT MEYO ABUOGO ......................................................................... 23RD RESPONDENT SAVINGS AND LOAN KENYA LIMITED ............................... 24TH RESPONDENT GOERGE NDEGWA T/A GREEN PLOT PROPERTIES ........ 25TH RESPONDENT AND ZADARACK OYARO ACHOKI ............................................ INTERESTED PARTY CLAUDFE JOSEPH KAMATA ............................................... INTERESTED PARTY MAXIMINUS EKADA MAASE .............................................. INTERESTED PARTY STEPHANIA ACHOM ............................................................ INTERESTED PARTY HESKETH M MBOTHU ......................................................... INTERESTED PARTY DIRECTIONS 1. This matter was scheduled for the hearing of the Objectors’ application dated 19th August 2025. It however emerged that there were two other applications filed in this matter; the first one is by the decree holder which is a notice of motion dated 15th September 2025 seeking to garnishee/attach accounts held by various banks in the name of the late Lawrence Nginyo Kariuki to satisfy the decretal amount of Kshs. 3,415,164.39 together with the costs of the execution and interest. Directions were yet to be given on this application. 2. The other application is by the administrators/legal representatives of the estate of the late Nginyo Kariuki. The Applicants seek three main prayers being substitution of the late Nginyo Kariuki with the administrators/legal representatives of his estate, extension of time within which to file a reference against the ruling on taxation of costs and ofi course the varying and or setting aside of the ruling of the taxing master on taxation mainly on the ground that the estate of the late Nginyo Kariuki was not aware of the proceedings and therefore did not participate in the taxation. 3. The decree holder conceded to the prayer for the substitution of the late Nginyo Kariuki with the administrators/legal representatives of his estate but sought time to respond to the other two prayers. 4. It is worth noting that the ruling of my predecessor, Justice M.N. Gicheru of 15th March 2022 awarded costs against the Estate of the Late Nginyo Kariuki. In the interest of justice, it is appropriate that the Estate of the Late Nginyo Kariuki be allowed an opportunity to voice its position through its duly appointed legal representatives who are now party to these proceedings. https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2025/6523/eng@2025-09-23 2

page 2 of 3

5. This court has the inherent power to make any orders as may be necessary for the ends of justice or to prevent abuse of the process of court. The scope of inherent powers of the court has been discussed in the Halsbury’s Laws of England, 4th Edition, Volume 37 paragraph 14 in the following words; “ The jurisdiction of the court which is comprised within term “inherent” is that which enables it to fulfil itself properly and efiectively as a court of law. The overriding feature of the inherent jurisdiction of the court is that it is part of the procedural law, both Civil and Criminal, and not part of substantive law; it is exercisable by summary process, without plenary trial; it may be invoked not only in relation to the parties in pending proceedings, but in relation to anyone, whether a party or not, and in relation to matters not raised in litigation between parties; it must be distinguished from the exercise of judicial discretion; it may be exercised even in circumstances governed by rules of court. The inherent jurisdiction of the court enables it to exercise control over process by regulating its proceedings, by preventing abuse of the process and by compelling the observance of the process …; In summary, it may be said that the inherent jurisdiction of the court is a virile and viable doctrine and has been defined as being the reserve or fund of powers, which the court may draw upon as necessary whenever it is just or equitable to do so in particular to ensure the observance of the due process of law to prevent improper vexation or oppression to do justice between parties and to secure a fair trial between them”. 6. Exercising its inherent jurisdiction in order to secure a fair trial between the parties herein, this court directs that the application by the legal representatives of the estate of Nginyo Kariuki dated 19th September 2025 be heard and considered first. Awaiting the determination, there shall be a stay of execution of the order on costs. 7. The decree holders are granted 14 days to file and serve a response to the application with corresponding leave to the applicants to file a response in 14 days after service, if need be, alongside written submissions. The decree holders shall file and serve their submissions in 14 days after service of the applicants’ submissions. The court shall give a date for highlighting of the submissions. It is so ordered. DATED SIGNED AND DELIVERED VIRTUALLY AT KAJIADO THIS 23RD DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2025. M.D. MWANGI JUDGE In the virtual presence of: Mr. Kere for the Objectors Ms. Kadima for the Executors of the Estate of Nginyo Kariuki Ms. Njuguna Joan h/b for Mr. Mwaniki for the Decree holders https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2025/6523/eng@2025-09-23 3

page 3 of 3