Muchiri v SBM Bank Limited & another (Civil Case E042 of 2025) [2025] KEHC 19262 (KLR) (26 November 2025) (Directions) Neutral citation: [2025] KEHC 19262 (KLR) REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT AT KIAMBU CIVIL CASE E042 OF 2025 DO CHEPKWONY, J NOVEMBER 26, 2025 BETWEEN VERONICAH MWIHAKI MUCHIRI ................................................... APPLICANT AND SBM BANK LIMITED ................................................................... 1ST RESPONDENT WATTS AUCTIONS ..................................................................... 2ND RESPONDENT DIRECTIONS 1. The matter is for mention for parties to confirm compliance for directions issued on 24th September, 2025 in respect of a Notice of Motion application dated 24th September, 2025. 2. According to counsel for the Applicant, they had not filed their written submissions since the Respondent had not filed their response. In response, counsel for the Respondents indicated that they had filed Grounds of Opposition dated 18th November, 2025 which they had served upon the Plaintiff/ Applicant. He went on to submit that a cursory look at the prayers sought by the Applicant and had noted that there was nothing further to determine as the application is spent. 3. The Applicant’s counsel responded by noting that there was a clerical error in the application and sought for status quo order to maintain and preserve the subject property. 4. In rejoinder, the Respondents’ counsel objected to an order of status quo being issued where an application is withdrawn. He submitted that he had filed an application seeking to have the suit struck out for several reasons which he contends to serve the Applicant for the court to issue directions on the same. 5. Having listened to both counsel for the Notice of Motion application dated 24th September, 2025 and notes that prayer No.(c) is similar in context with prayer No.(b) of the application, which clearly appear to be a clerical and or typographical error which does not go to the roof of the application has https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2025/19262/eng@2025-11-26 1
page 1 of 3
its substance and purpose cannot affect substance justice for the other party. This is governed by the principle stipulated under Article 159(2)(d) of the Constitution which states that:“ (2) In exercising judicial authority, the courts and tribunals shall be guided by the following principles— d. 6. justice shall be administered without undue regard to procedural technicalities; In view of this, the Court proceeds to find that instead of the Applicant being allowed to withdraw the Notice of Motion application dated 24th September, 2025 she should be directed to amend the same by wording it correctly so as to safe on resources and precious judicial time, and most importantly, the avoid throwing off the Applicant from the seat of justice. In doing this, the court has sought refuge by invoking its discretion as provided for in the Civil Procedure Act under the following provisions:Section 1A (1):1A. Objective of Act 1. The overriding objective of this Act and the rules made hereunder is to facilitate the just, expeditious, proportionate and affordable resolution of the civil disputes governed by the Act. 2. The Court shall, in the exercise of its powers under this Act or the interpretation of any of its provisions, seek to give effect to the overriding objective specified in subsection (1). 3. A party to civil proceedings or an advocate for such a party is under a duty to assist the Court to further the overriding objective of the Act and, to that effect, to participate in the processes of the Court and to comply with the directions and orders of the Court. Section 1B (1):1B. Duty of Court (1) For the purpose of furthering the overriding objective specified in section 1A, the Court shall handle all matters presented before it for the purpose of attaining the following aims— (a) the just determination of the proceedings; (b) the efficient disposal of the business of the Court; (c) the efficient use of the available judicial and administrative resources; (d) the timely disposal of the proceedings, and all other proceedings in the Court, at a cost affordable by the respective parties; and (e) the use of suitable technology. Section 3A:“ 3A. Saving of inherent powers of court. Nothing in this Act shall limit or otherwise affect the inherent power of the court to make such orders as may be necessary for the ends of justice or to prevent abuse of the process of the court. https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2025/19262/eng@2025-11-26 2
page 2 of 3
7. Therefore, the Court directs that:a. The Applicant be and is hereby granted leave to amend the Notice of Motion application dated 24th September, 2025. b. The Applicant to file and serve the Amended Notice of Motion application within seven (7) days from the date hereof. c. The Respondent to file and serve its response within seven (7) days of being served with the Amended Notice of Motion application. d. Mention on 19th January, 2026 for parties to confirm compliance and take further directions. It is so ordered. RULING DELIVERED VIRTUALLY, DATED AND SIGNED AT KIAMBU THIS 26TH DAY OF NOVEMBER ,2025. D. O. CHEPKWONY JUDGE In the presence of: Mr. Gacharia holding brief for Mr. Waweru Nyambura counsel for the Plaintiff/Applicant Mr. Mwangi counsel for 1st Defendant/Respondent Court Assistant – Martin/Sakina https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2025/19262/eng@2025-11-26 3
page 3 of 3