Trustees of Maximum Miracle Centre v Equity Bank (K) Limited [2022] KEHC 17211 (KLR)

Trustees of Maximum Miracle Centre v Equity Bank (K) Limited (Commercial Case E055 of 2021) [2022] KEHC 17211 (KLR) (Commercial and Tax) (15 November 2022) (Ruling)

Neutral citation: [2022] KEHC 17211 (KLR)

Republic of Kenya

In the High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Commercial Courts Commercial and Tax Division)

Commercial and Tax

Commercial Case E055 of 2021

DO Chepkwony, J

November 15, 2022

Between

Trustees of Maximum Miracle Centre

Plaintiff

and

Equity Bank (K) Limited

Defendant

Ruling

1. This matter came up for mention for parties to confirm filing of submissions with respect to the Plaintiff’s Notice of Motion application dated May 6, 2022 which substantially seeks the court’s indulgence to extend time within which to pay the sum of Kshs.27,903,260. 50 as directed in a ruling dated 11th November, 2021 by an additional 90 days. Both parties confirmed having filed their submissions. And while Mr. Mbayi wanted to rely on his submissions and take a date for ruling, Mr. Kamau expressed the desire to highlight her submissions. She has then requested for a date to do so and for an extension of the subsisting interim orders, taking into account that the Respondent had served them with a Notification for sale dated 1st November, 2022. She has gone on to add that the Applicant has shown good will by paying Kshs.14,880,000/= out of the Kshs.27,903,260. 50, as directed by the court on November 11, 2021 and was even ready to deposit a further Kshs.5,000,000/= by close of business the following day.

2. Mr. Mbayi, counsel for the Respondent responded by arguing that there were no interim orders in place since the court had directed in its ruling dated November 11, 2021, that the Plaintiff pays the sum of Kshs.27,903,260. 50 within six (6) months of the ruling failing to which the injunctive orders would lapse. Thus since six (6) months have lapsed, counting from the date of the ruling, there are no interim orders in place to extend.

3. In my view, six (6) months lapsed on May 11, 2022 counting from the date of ruling which was on November 11, 2021. The applications seeking extension of the orders was made on May 6, 2022.

4. In view of all the above, I am satisfied that the Plaintiff moved the court aptly and had demonstrated a good-will by making some sufficient payment towards the amount owed. I believe, it would be in the interest of justice that they are given a chance for their application dated May 6, 2022 to be considered on merit without the anxiety and fear of facing execution by the Respondent.

5. Having said that, this court directs that the prevailing status quo bemaintained pending the determination of the Plaintiff’s application dated May 6, 2022 on merit.

6. I have also taken into consideration the nature of prayers that have been sought for in the application and since parties have filed their respective submissions, the same are not so technical as to require counsel to want for a chance to highlight the same in two months. It would be in the interest of justice for the court to rely on the parties submissions as filed.

RULING DELIVERED VIRTUALLY, DATED AND SIGNED AT NAIROBI THIS 15TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2022. D. O. CHEPKWONYJUDGEIn the presence of:Mrs. Kamau holding brief for Mr. Kyalo for PlaintiffMr. Mbayi counsel for DefendantCourt Assistant - Sakina