'1. In the application dated 10th September 2025, the plaintiff/applicant prays to be granted an interim injunction for a period of ninety (90) days to restrain the defendants/respondents, their employees, agents and/or servants from disposing of, by selling by private treaty or public auction or from transferring and/or in any manner dealing with the plaintiff/applicant’s property known as Villa No. 5 situated on LR No. 330/270 (Original No. 330/185/2) Vol N. 93 Folio: 50/1 File 27705) Crystal Villas, Thomson Estate, Nairobi County pending the takeover of the plaintiff’s loan by M/s Kenya Commercial Bank Ltd.
2. I have considered the said application in light of the Mediation Agreement dated 13th June 2024 and the response by the 1st defendant. In as much as the plaintiff is appealing to this Court to be given more time to put his affairs in order, I cannot set aside the Consent Judgment or vary its terms.
3. The 1st defendant is the only one at this point in time that has the liberty of accommodating the request by the plaintiff to be given an additional ninety (90) days to repay the loan.
4. As it is, the principles laid out in the case of Giella v Cassman Brown & Company Limited (1973) EA 358 for grant of an injunction have not been established by the plaintiff.
5. I therefore decline to grant the prayers being sought in the application dated 10th September 2025. The auction can therefore proceed, unless otherwise called off by the 1st defendant.
It is so ordered.
DELIVERED, DATED and SIGNED at NAIROBI on this 16th day September of 2025. Ruling delivered through Microsoft Teams Online Platform.
NJOKI MWANGI
JUDGE
In the presence of:-
Mr. Kiprono for the plaintiff/applicant
Mr. Oketch for the defendants/respondents
Ms B. Wokabi - Court Assistant.
'
2. I have considered the said application in light of the Mediation Agreement dated 13th June 2024 and the response by the 1st defendant. In as much as the plaintiff is appealing to this Court to be given more time to put his affairs in order, I cannot set aside the Consent Judgment or vary its terms.
3. The 1st defendant is the only one at this point in time that has the liberty of accommodating the request by the plaintiff to be given an additional ninety (90) days to repay the loan.
4. As it is, the principles laid out in the case of Giella v Cassman Brown & Company Limited (1973) EA 358 for grant of an injunction have not been established by the plaintiff.
5. I therefore decline to grant the prayers being sought in the application dated 10th September 2025. The auction can therefore proceed, unless otherwise called off by the 1st defendant.
It is so ordered.
DELIVERED, DATED and SIGNED at NAIROBI on this 16th day September of 2025. Ruling delivered through Microsoft Teams Online Platform.
NJOKI MWANGI
JUDGE
In the presence of:-
Mr. Kiprono for the plaintiff/applicant
Mr. Oketch for the defendants/respondents
Ms B. Wokabi - Court Assistant.
'