IN THE CHIEF MAGISTRATE’S COURT AT NAKURU (Coram: Ndege, SPM) CIVIL SUIT NO. E423 OF 2025 FATHIMA AAMRIN………….…………………………………….……………………….……...PLAINTIFF VERSUS PROGRESSIVE CREDIT LIMITED............................................................... DEFENDANT RULING 1. On 29/07/2025, this court made a ruling dismissing the plaintiff’s application dated 12/05/2025 for orders of injunction against the sale of KIAMBOGO/ KIMBOGO BLOCK 2/799 (MWARIKI). The main suit dated 12/05/2025 was thus due for pre-trials. 2. It is the defendant’s oral contention that on 14/10/2025, the plaintiff herein filed a similar application and suit both dated 14/10/2025 at Milimani, magistrate’s Court, bearing case title and number MILIMANI MCCC E7110 OF
page 1 of 4
inthechiefmagistrate’scourtatnakuruacoramndegespmcivilsuitnomccce423of2025fathimaaamrinplaintiffversusprogr essivecreditlimiteddefendantruling 2025: FATHIMA AAMRIN VS PROGRESSIVE CREDIT LIMITED AND ONYX AUCTIONEERS. That on 15/10/2025, after filing the aforesaid Milimani case, the plaintiff filed a Notice of Withdrawal of this suit and backdated it to 09/10/2025. That the defendant was however never served with this notice. 3. Meanwhile this suit came up for the pretrial directions on 26/03/2026 as earlier fixed. Counsel for the Plaintiff raised the issue of the notice of withdrawal. That the notice was unproceduraly and unethically backdated. Learned counsel for the defendant therefore vehemently opposed the withdrawal. In support of the opposition, the defendant filed a list with some documents which it wants the court to rely on to decline the withdrawal. 4. I have however agonized about whether this court can rely on the documents as filed herein, especially on whether they are evidence that the court can act on to make a determination on the issues raised herein. I have arrived at a decision that this court cannot legally act on or use documents simply presented or ‘thrown’ alongside the submissions or during the oral application if they are not properly annexed to a supporting affidavit or introduced through formal, recognized legal procedures. This is because evidence relied upon in an application must be verified under oath through a sworn affidavit. Page 2 of 4
page 2 of 4
inthechiefmagistrate’scourtatnakuruacoramndegespmcivilsuitnomccce423of2025fathimaaamrinplaintiffversusprogr essivecreditlimiteddefendantruling Parties cannot hand, throw at the bench or simply file raw documents, without formally filing them and giving the opposing side a chance to respond accordingly. The rules are clear that if a party wants to rely on any document during an application, it must be annexed as an exhibit to a supporting affidavit. 5. Given the serious issue of abuse of the court process through forum shopping that has been raised in opposition to the notice of withdrawal filed herein, I shall require the defendant or his counsel, as may be appropriate, to file an affidavit in opposition to the Notice of Withdrawal in which it shall attach all the relevant documentary exhibits it intends to rely on in opposing the notice. DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED AT NAKURU, VIRTUALLY, THIS _10th___DAY OF __September___, 2026 ALOYCE-PETER-NDEGE SENIOR PRINCIPAL MAGISTRATE In the presence of; Plaintiff’s Counsel: n/a Defendant’s Counsel: Musamali Page 3 of 4
page 3 of 4
inthechiefmagistrate’scourtatnakuruacoramndegespmcivilsuitnomccce423of2025fathimaaamrinplaintiffversusprogr essivecreditlimiteddefendantruling Plaintiff: n/a CT: The file be mention before CT 1 at Nakuru on 08/10/26 for further directions and/or reallocation. MNTI. Page 4 of 4
page 4 of 4