REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT AT NAIROBI
CIVIL CASE NO. 2401 OF 1998
HANNAH MUMBI KOMO……………………..……….PLAINTIFF
-VERSUS
LEONARD NJOGU NJAU T/A
KINYANJUI & NJAU ADVOCATES……………….DEFENDANTS
JUDGEMENT
The Plaintiff has filed an Originating Summons asking for the balance of money from the Defendants being a sum of shs.260,000/- There is enough evidence that the Defendants were paid the sum of Shs. 1.2 million by the Plaintiff’s employers to enable her purchase a plot from Mr. Hezron Kuria Kagone. The evidence shows that following the request by the vendor by his letter of 21.11.1997 the Defendant was authorised to pay the money to the Plaintiff so that she can pay the vendor since the vendor did not have a bank account. There is also evidence that the advocates following these instructions did pay to the Plaintiff a total sum of Shs.900,000 which was passed to the vendor leaving a balance of Shs.300,000/-.
The Plaintiff in her evidence said that the agreed fees between her and the Advocate was Shs.40,000. She had to borrow more money from her Co-operative Society to finalise the purchase.
I have examined and considered the documents produced by the plaintiff in her evidence which include the Agreement for Sale dated 24.7.1997 the letters dated 19.11.97, 24.11.97, 21.11.97, 30.4.98, 15.4.98 and 4th February, 1998. There are also the two hand written notes from the Defendants to the Plaintiff one dated 11.12.97 and the other one undated. This correspondence clearly confirms the Plaintiff’’s evidence which I accept. I have read the affidavit by Leonard Njau dated 26.11.98 in which he claims that the sum of Kshs.1.2 was not to be paid to the Plaintiff and that she had no authority to act for the vendor. This assertion makes no sense at all and is an attempt to deny the obvious. The defendant passed a sum of Kshs.900,000 to the plaintiff which was paid to the vendor. I accept the Plaintiff’’s evidence that the plaintiff did so on the strength of the letter dated 11.12.97 which is an authority for the plaintiffs to pay this money to the vendor through the Plaintiff.
This letter was not challenged. The contents of this affidavit are an attempt to simply delay the resolution of this matter. After considering the plaintiffs evidence as supported by these documents I find that the Defendant was paid the sum of kshs.1.200,000 out of which there was a balance of Shs.300,000 due to the Plaintiff. The plaintiff said that the agreed fees between her and the Defendant was kshs.40,000 although she had to engage the services of another lawyer to complete the transaction. Accepting the figure of Shs.40,000 as the fees then the amount unpaid out of the original sum of Kshs.1.200,000 is Shs.260,000.
There will be judgment for the plaintiff for the sum of Kshs.260,000 together with costs and interest.
Delivered and dated this 21st day of November, 2000.
KASANGA MULWA
JUDGE