JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
As with most legal proceedings, the parties’ versions of the truth in this case are as varied as the orders they have sought in various court proceedings amongst themselves. But what is not contested is that the respondents are the legal representatives of the estate of the late Hansapal Kultar (the deceased).According to the appellant, on 15th March 1988 and 2nd August, 1988, the deceased, advanced two friendly loans totaling Kshs.800,000/- to the appellant, for the purchase of land parcels described as Plot Nos CR 18142- Subdivision No 848/III/MN, CR 18143-Subdivision No. 849/II/MN, CR 18144- Subdivision No. 850/III/MN, CR 18145- Subdivision No. 851/III/MN and CR 181146- Subdivision No. 852/III/MN together with the remainder of the mother title, CR No. 18147 all hereinafter referred to as “the suit premises”.
The suit premises were duly purchased and registered in the appellant’s name. As part of the terms of the loan agreement it was understood that upon receipt…