JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
The dispute between the parties to this suit involves a motor vehicle whose value has been given as Ksh. 150,000/=. The parties have litigated over this vehicle from the magistrate’s court to the High Court and now to the Court of Appeal. The bone of contention is the validity of a sale agreement dated 1st November, 2006 between the parties. The respondent contends that the sale agreement is genuine and valid; the appellants contend the sale agreement is a forgery.
The pertinent facts are that the appellants owned motor vehicle registration no. KAU 009 S Land Rover pick-up. The respondent states that by sale agreement dated 1st November, 2006, the appellants jointly and severally entered into a sale agreement for motor vehicle KAU 009 S for a consideration of Ksh. 150,000/=. The appellants deny selling the motor vehicle and insist that the sale agreement dated 1st November 2006 is a forgery.
The respondent filed suit against the appellants at the Chief Magistrate’s …