Skip to content
JudgmentHELLEN WAMBUI KIMANI WAINAINA AND PATRICK KIMANI WAINAINA VS MIDDLE EAST BANK KENYA LIMITED AND GARAM INVESTMENTS AUCTIONEERS AND 1 Others2 min read

HELLEN WAMBUI KIMANI WAINAINA AND PATRICK KIMANI WAINAINA VS MIDDLE EAST BANK KENYA LIMITED AND GARAM INVESTMENTS AUCTIONEERS AND 1 Others

High Court at Milimani High Court · · Njoroge Benjamin K.

1. The application before the Court is dated 16.7.2026.
2. Mr. Kounah is seeking for an interim order in terms of prayers No. 2 of the application. He also seeks that the Court certifies the application as urgent.
3. The Court did direct the Plaintiff’s/Applicant’s to serve the application upon the Defendants/Respondents. They have appeared in Court through Counsel. They oppose the urgency as well as granting of any interim orders in this matter.
4. Mr. Kounah submits that his clients challenge the process upon which the property was sold at a public auction. That some notice was not served.
5. The Court has heard from Mr. Esmail Counsel for the 2nd Defendant and Mr. Muteithia Counsel for the 1st Defendant. They both submit that the sale is now complete and the equity of redemption is now lost. The balance of the purchase price is fully paid and that, all that is left is for registration.
6. Mr. Njuguna Counsel for the 3rd Defendant submitted that his client is the Innocent purchaser. It purchased the property at the public auction and has paid the full purchase price. It is deserving to have its rights protected. It has not been accused of any wrong doing.
7. Mr. Kounah finally submitted that if the Court does not give the orders sought, the registration will be finalized. There will be nothing to litigate upon thereafter.
8. This Court reminds itself that it is called upon to determine the issue of the urgency as well as granting of interim orders.
9. The Court is yet to hear the parties fully ventilate their position before the Court.
10. What should concern the Court at this point in time is whether the substratum of the suit can be preserved in the interim.
11. The Court also has to balance the rights of the Defendants who argues that the transaction is not flawed and hence it should not be stopped.
12. The Court notes that if the registration is completed, the property will have forever moved to the 3rd Defendant. As far as this suit is concerned, the Court will no longer have any adjudicative rights over it.
13. The lesser evil will be to grant the interim injunction sought to restrain the registration of the transfer. That will maintain the status quo as well as the present.
14. The funds have been paid over, so the question is one of delay in registration.
15. As this matter is yet to be canvased before the Court, the Court will refrain to delve more into the facts. The parties will address the Court in detail during the plenary hearing.

Determination
16. The Court certifies the application dated 16.7.2026.
17. The Court grants the interim orders restraining the registration of the transfer of the property in favour of the 3rd Defendant, pending the hearing and determination of this application.
18. The Court issues directions as follows;
a) The Defendants are HEREBY granted 21 days to put in their Replying Affidavits.
b) The Plaintiff to file a further affidavit and submissions within 14
days.
c) The Defendants for file their submissions within 14 days.
d) Highlighting on 12.10.2026.
e) Parties to comply with the timeliness set strictly.
DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED AT MILIMANI THIS 23RD DAY OF JULY, 2026

NJOROGE BENJAMIN K.
JUDGE