REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT AT NAIROBI COMMERCIAL & TAX DIVISION MILIMANI LAW COURTS HCCA E024 OF 2020 SUSAN WANJIRU WAGENDO....................................................... .......DECREE HOLDER VERSUS AMESNET ENTERPRISES LIMITED, JAMES MWANGI MBUGUA & JANET WAITHIRA MACHARIA......................................................J UDGMENT DEBTORS PARTIAL RULING 1. The decree holder’s notice of motion dated 25.5.2025 expressed to be brought under section 38 (f) of the Civil Procedure Act is for a vesting order in execution of a decree. 2. More specifically, seeking an order for execution of the decree dated 26.7.2019 by vesting the property known as Plot No. 7914/III/MN Title No. CR 54068 within North of Mombasa Municipality in the decree holder’s or her nominee’s name in partial satisfaction of the decree issued in her favour against the judgment debtors.
page 1 of 4
3. The application is supported by the grounds on its face and the supporting affidavit sworn by the decree holder on 25.5.2025. 4. The grounds upon which the application is premised are: a) That the judgment debtors have failed to settle the decretal sum despite the decree holder’s numerous efforts to execute. b) That the subject property is the only known property in the judgment debtors’ names. c) That numerous attempts to sell the property by public auction have been unsuccessful as no bid matched the reserve price. d) That the property returned a forced sale value of Kshs. 5,000,000/- as per a valuation report of 13.11.2025 whereas the decretal sum owing is Kshs. 16,000,000/-. 5. The decree holder filed written submissions dated 29.10.2025. 6. There was no response filed by the respondents. When the matter was mentioned on 30.6.2025 and 16.12.2025, there was no appearance by or for the respondents. The decree holder’s counsel
page 2 of 4
indicated that the application was served upon the respondents. 7. However, during preparation of the ruling, the court could not find any evidence of service. 8. The application at hand deals with a critical mode of execution by way of orders vesting of the respondents’ property in the decree holder’s name in partial satisfaction of the decree. 9. Thus, making it absolutely necessary that the rules of natural justice are adhered to by affording the party to be affected by the order an opportunity to be heard before any adverse decision is made against them or their property. The right is reflected in articles 48 and 50 of the Constitution. Directions 10. Now therefore, for the court to be properly sanctified in issuing any order sought, the following directions are issued: (1)If the applicant served the application, it shall file an affidavit of service thereto immediately.
page 3 of 4
(2)If it did not serve, to serve the application dated 25.5.2025 upon the respondents within 7 days and a return of service filed within 5 days of service. (3) The earlier directions issued regarding the delivery of the ruling are hereby vacated. (4)As the case may be, given the age of the matter and facts pleaded in the application, a hearing or ruling date shall be given on the basis of priority. Dated, signed and delivered at Nairobi through Microsoft Teams online application this 23rd day of April, 2026 ------------F. Gikonyo M Judge In the presence of: Isuhi for Applicant N/A for Respondent CA – Ivan/Aggrey
page 4 of 4