Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Original judgment

High Court 8117 of 2021

REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI MILIMANI COMMERCIAL & TAX DIVISION INSOLVENCY PETITION NO. E 174 OF 2019 IN THE MATTER OF THE COMPANIES ACT NO. 18 OF 2015 AND IN THE MATTER OF THE COMPANIES ACT NO. 17 OF 2015 AND IN THE MATTER OF KINGS PRIDE PROPERTIES LIMITED LIQUIDATION PETITION (pursuant to Section 425 of the Insolvency Act No. 18 of 2015) RULING The Applicant/Respondent herein(KINGS PRIDE PROPERTIES LIMITED) raised a Preliminary Objection dated 26th May 2020, to the Petition and the entire Proceedings herein and urged the Court to determine the objection in limine and strike out the Petition and entire Proceedings with costs to the Respondent on grounds that; a. It offends the provisions of Order 1 Rule 10(2) of the Civil Procedure Rules, 2010 as the Applicant/Respondent herein has been wrongly sued by the Petitioners’ as there was no existing contract between the Petitioners and the Respondent. Nor was the Respondent in charge of “the Development” that is alleged in the current Petition. b. That it further offends the provisions of Order 2 Rule 15 of the Civil Procedure Rules, 2010 as the current Petition does not disclose a reasonable cause of action as against the Applicant/Respondent herein for the reasons stated in (a) above. No response by the Respondent was filed. They indicated negotiations ongoing but did not respond to the Preliminary Objection. The Preliminary Objection is unchallenged and therefore is upheld. DELIVERED SIGNED& DATED IN OPEN COURT ON 19TH MARCH 2021 (VIRTUAL CONFERENCE) M.W. MUIGAI JUDGE IN THE PRESENCE OF; MR. KULOBA FOR THE APPLICANT H/B MR. KURIA FOR THE PETITIONER. COURT ASSISTANT: TUPET

A note on accuracy. These pages are generated automatically from our AI-written case briefs and have not been checked by a lawyer. Case titles and citations come from Kenya Law; the counts, topics, propositions and “treatment” labels are derived from the briefs and can be incomplete or wrong. Use them as a research aid and always read the original judgment before relying on anything here. This is not legal advice.