REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA NAIROBI CIVIL APPELLATE DIVISION HCCA E660 OF 2025 CYRUS TEA KENYA LIMITED……………………….…. …..APPELLANT VERSUS SIDIAN BANK LIMITED …………………. ………………..RESPONDENT RULING 1. The motion before me seeks restraining orders for sale of several motor vehicles by the respondent, statement of accounts and release of the said motor vehicles to the Applicant on the basis that the Appellant has not breached the agreement it entered with the respondent. The history of this matter is that the lower Court exposed the Appellant to grave danger by vacating stay orders paving way for sale of the aforesaid motor vehicles. Aggrieved with the lower Court decision, the appellant filed an appeal which is said to have high chances of success. The application is vehemently opposed by the respondent who has relied on basic principles of stay and I shall not repeat them here. 2. This Court notes that there is an order requiring the Appellant HCCA E660/2025 /EK to deposit a decretal amount pending the 1
page 1 of 3
determination of this matter. This order has not been set aside. At this juncture, I cannot be certain that the Appellant proceeded to deposit the decretal amount and if my assumption is that this order was complied with, then the application is allowed in terms of maintaining status quo since there would be already a proper security. If by any chance the conditional order has not been complied with, then the application will be dismissed with costs. 3. The finality of my decision depends on the compliance with my order dated the 19th day of June 2025. The application will only be allowed if the decretal amount has already been deposited in court and in this case, what will be allowed shall be the release of the attached motor vehicles only because the decretal amount will be sufficient security. In that case, there will be no need for the Respondent to continue holding the Respondent’s motor vehicles. On the prayer for statement of accounts, additional evidence can only be admitted by an Appellate Court in exceptional circumstances. The Appellant has not demonstrated any exceptional circumstances to warrant this Court to grant an order for statement of accounts. The Appellant must have had an opportunity to seek for this prayer at the lower Court and cannot do so at this stage. 4. If there is noncompliance with the conditional stay issued above, the application stands dismissed with costs because there is no security nor is there an application to vary the orders issued on the 19th day of June 2025. This is because HCCA E660/2025 /EK 2
page 2 of 3
Court orders must be obeyed and decisions by Judicial officers must always be consistent. There is no way that this Court can issue an order that contradicts an order earlier issued. 5. Orders issued accordingly. DATED, DELIVERED VIRTUALLY AND SIGNED ON THIS 29TH DAY OF JUNE 2026 HON L P KASSAN JUDGE HCCA E660/2025 /EK 3
page 3 of 3