1. I have considered the Application dated 30.7.20 and the affidavit in support of the same sworn on 3rd July, 2020. I note the same is not opposed and an affidavit of service and return of service is available on the court file.
2. The Applicant is praying for the cross examination of the Directors of the Company as set out in prayer No. 1.
3. The Applicant stated that it obtained a decree from the court, it has been unable to satisfy the same, and leave of this court is required to examine the Directors in relation to satisfaction of the said debt.
4. I am of the view that Masefield Trading (K) Ltd v Rushmore Company Limited & Another Civil Suit No. 1794 of 2000; [2008] eKLR, is the relevant law in relation to the jurisdiction of this court under Order 22 Rule 35:
“I, therefore, take the view that, as long as the Applicant has shown that the Respondent is in a position to provide information in the nature of discovery ...as to whether any or what debts are owing to the judgment-debtor, and whether the judgment-debtor has any and what property or means of satisfying the decree, the court should summon the person to attend and be examined in relation to the purpose stated in the rule.”
5. Applying my mind to the law as stated above, and based on the reasons stated by counsel, I am satisfied that prayer 1 ought to be granted for the purpose of discovery in aid of execution.
6. The Directors are summoned to appear for a hearing in terms of prayer No. 1 on 17th June, 2024.
7. The Applicant shall have the costs of the application.