REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE SMALL CLAIMS COURT AT NAIROBI MILIMANI LAW COURTS SCCOMM NO. E100498 OF 2025 BENSON NJERU NJUGUNA………………………...…………… CLAIMANT VERSUS GEOFFREY KARANJA………..……………………...……. ….RESPONDENT JUDGMENT 1. The claimant instituted this claim vide the statement dated 17/9/2025 seeking judgment against the respondent for the sum of Kshs. 550,000/= plus costs and interests on the basis that he delivered a complete Ford Range engine to the respondent on 11/7/2025 but the respondent failed to pay within the agreed 7 day period and subsequently returned a dismantled engine which the claimant declined to accept. 2. The respondent filed the response dated 3/10/2025 and admitted purchasing the engine from the claimant but alleged that the parties had agreed that payment would only be made after installation and confirmation that the engine was functioning properly. That the engine was defective and was returned to the claimant for exchange but the claimant refused to receive it. 1|Page JUDGMENT SCCE100498 OF 2025
page 1 of 4
3. The claim proceeded under Section 30 of the SCC Act and the claimant filed submissions dated 16/2/2026 whereas the respondent’s were dated 10/3/2026. I have considered those submissions alongside the pleadings and evidence on record. 4. The main issue for determination is whether the claimant has proven his claim as against the respondent on a balance of probabilities. See the court of Appeal in Mumbi M'Nabea v David M.Wachira [2016] eKLR. It also trite that he who alleges must prove as provided for in Section 107 and 108 of the Evidence Act. 5. It was not denied that the claimant delivered the engine to the respondent. The claimant produced a delivery note confirming delivery of a complete engine to the respondent. The same indicated that the engine was supplied with a seven-day guarantee. Having proven delivery, it was upon the respondent to demonstrate that the engine was defective and that he raised the complaint within the guarantee period. 6. I do note that other than the assertions in his defense, there was no evidence whatsoever to support the allegation that the engine was faulty. No mechanic’s report or statement, inspection report, photographs, messages, demand, correspondence or any complaint made to the claimant was produced. There was no evidence at all to show that the respondent notified the claimant of any defect within the seven-day guarantee period. It was not clear when such complaint was made. Even then, though the respondent did 2|Page JUDGMENT SCCE100498 OF 2025
page 2 of 4
not deny delivery of a complete engine, he did not challenge the allegation that he attempted to return a dismantled engine and that the same was dismantled without the claimant’s authority. The claimant’s refusal to accept a dismantled engine was thus justified. 7. Further, though the respondent alleged that he obtained another engine which was installed and functioned perfectly, there was no receipt, invoice, import documentation, proof of payment or any other documentary evidence that was presented to support that allegation. 8. On the other hand, the delivery note confirmed delivery of the engine and the existence of a seven-day guarantee. There is no evidence that the engine was rejected within that period or that any complaint was raised concerning its quality or performance. It then follows that the respondent retained possession of the engine without payment and without proving any lawful basis for withholding the agreed purchase price. 9. In the circumstances, I am convinced that the claimant proved his claim on a balance of probabilities. 10. The upshot is that the claim is merited. Accordingly, I hereby enter judgment in the following terms: 1. Judgment is hereby entered in favor of the claimant as against the respondent for the sum of Kshs. 550,000/= plus interest at court rates from the date of judgment till payment in full. 3|Page JUDGMENT SCCE100498 OF 2025
page 3 of 4
2. The claimant is awarded costs of the suit assessed at Kshs. 25,000/=. 11. The respondent is granted 30 days stay of execution. It is so decreed. DATED and DELIVERED via CTS at NAIROBI this 7TH Day of August 2026 HON. GLADYS. W. KIAMAH RESIDENT MAGISTRATE/ADJUDICATOR 4|Page JUDGMENT SCCE100498 OF 2025
page 4 of 4