The document summarizes a civil appeal case regarding a dispute over the right of redemption on a mortgaged property. The appellant had lent money to the respondent secured by a mortgage on the respondent's property. When the respondent defaulted, the appellant initiated foreclosure proceedings to sell the property. The high court and court of appeal both held that the respondent retained the right to redeem the property by paying the debt owed, as the appellant had not yet exercised the power of sale as allowed by law. The court of appeal upheld the high court's ruling and ordered the appellant to discharge the mortgage once payment was made.
Original Description:
chargees statutory power of sale
Original Title
Industrial & Commercial Development Corporation v Kariuki Gatheca
The document summarizes a civil appeal case regarding a dispute over the right of redemption on a mortgaged property. The appellant had lent money to the respondent secured by a mortgage on the respondent's property. When the respondent defaulted, the appellant initiated foreclosure proceedings to sell the property. The high court and court of appeal both held that the respondent retained the right to redeem the property by paying the debt owed, as the appellant had not yet exercised the power of sale as allowed by law. The court of appeal upheld the high court's ruling and ordered the appellant to discharge the mortgage once payment was made.
The document summarizes a civil appeal case regarding a dispute over the right of redemption on a mortgaged property. The appellant had lent money to the respondent secured by a mortgage on the respondent's property. When the respondent defaulted, the appellant initiated foreclosure proceedings to sell the property. The high court and court of appeal both held that the respondent retained the right to redeem the property by paying the debt owed, as the appellant had not yet exercised the power of sale as allowed by law. The court of appeal upheld the high court's ruling and ordered the appellant to discharge the mortgage once payment was made.
GATHECA RESOURCES LTD CIVIL APPEAL NO 45 OF 1976 CORAM LAW V-P, MUSTAFA & MUSOKE JJ A SUMMARY OF THE FACTS • The case involves a dispute over the right of redemption on a mortgaged property. The appellant had lent money to the respondent and had taken mortgage over the respondent’s property as security for the loan. The respondent had defaulted the loan and the appellant had initiated foreclosure proceedings to sell the property and recover the debt. The respondent argued that they had tendered the full amount the appellant’s advocates and they had refused the money. The appellant argued that they had a right of redemption under section 69(1) of the transfer of property act which allowed them to reclaim property by paying off the outstanding debt. • The case was heard in the high court, where the court dismissed the appellant's application for discharge of an injunction and held that the respondent had not lost it’s right to redeem. The court also ordered the appellant to deliver the documents of title to discharge the mortgage. The appellant appealed the decision to the court of appeal. HOLDING • The court of appeal upheld the decision of the high court. The court held that the appellant had not yet exercised the power of sale within the meaning of section 69(1) of the transfer of property act and that the respondent had not lost its right to redeem. The court held that the amount that had been tendered into the appellant's advocates constituted payment in full and it ordered them to deliver the necessary documents of title to discharge the mortgaged property. HOLDING –CONCURRING • Law V.P agreed with every aspect of the judgement prepared by Mustafa JA, however, he did not agree with the judges findings of bad faith on the part of the appellant. • The appeal was dismissed.