A mason told the Court of Appeal that he spent Sh6 million over 25 years to recover Sh47,500 from his client.

Despite being jailed for threats, losing his case thrice and being condemned to pay costs, Peter Kinyanjui did not relent from pursuing Virginia Waithera in court for alleged breach of contract.

Although he has never hired a lawyer to represent him, Kinyanjui told the court it cost him 126 times the amount he was seeking, but Justices William Ouko, Patrick Kiage and Agnes Murgor did not believe him.

“The amount of money the subject matter of this dispute may appear insignificant, Sh47,500, but the appellant, acting in person, has pursued it with the determination and gusto of the biblical Nehemiah, who, despite discouragement from others, rebuilt the walls of Jerusalem,” the judges observed.

The legal battle between the two, which started in 1993, surrounds an unwritten deal that Kinyanjui would allegedly supervise construction of her house.

He also told the court that the businesswoman owed him as he helped her select the plot where the house was erected.

In a judgment read on their behalf by Justice Kathurima M’Inoti, the judges said: “Despite losing the case and several applications in the subordinate court, he has, with resilience, climbed to this court through the High Court, seeking justice. With some exaggeration, he told us that he has spent Sh6,000,000 to date to recover the Sh47,500.”

Kinyanjui met Waithera in Makongeni, Thika, and they agreed he should supervise construction of her house after successfully finding her a plot.

At some point, the two disagreed on the quality of work and use of building materials, and Waithera fired Kinyanjui.

The mason claimed out of their trust for each other he bought her building materials worth Sh67,500 from his pocket but she never refunded the whole amount.

Waithera denied owing him anything, adding that Kinyanjui confiscated her title deed as a way of forcing her pay the debt.

The judges found Kinyanjui to have abused court process, as he did not have receipts or witnesses to show he bought the materials or worked as a supervisor for Waithera.

“The trial court found no proof that the appellant was entitled to any fees for supervising the construction or for provision of building materials. We find no substance in the appeal,” the judges ruled.