[2022] KEELC 14753 (KLR)
The court found that the security deposit of Kshs 1.5 million was made pursuant to a court order as a condition for stay of execution pending appeal. The appeal was subsequently filed and determined, with the Court of Appeal dismissing the defendants' appeal. As there is no longer any justification for retaining the...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2022] KEELC 14753 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Bahati Properties; Defendant: Attorney General; Defendant: Said M Mabavu; Defendant: Anna W Dereva; Defendant: Abdalla Mwachibulo Hema; Defendant: Fatuma S Nchizumo; Defendant: Omar Mashaka; Defendant: Mahfudh Mohamed Mwamtuku; Defendant: Rama Matano Mwaurinda
- Court
- Environment and Land Court
- Court Station
- Environment and Land Court at Mombasa
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Environment & Land Case 31 of 2015
- Procedural Posture
- Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Release of Security Deposit Post Appeal
- Outcome
- application allowed in part
- Judges
- SM Kibunja
- Legal Topics
- Security for Costs, Stay of Execution, Release of Deposit, Appeals Process
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Bahati Properties
Plaintiff
Attorney General
Defendant
Said M Mabavu
Defendant
Anna W Dereva
Defendant
Abdalla Mwachibulo Hema
Defendant
Fatuma S Nchizumo
Defendant
Omar Mashaka
Defendant
Mahfudh Mohamed Mwamtuku
Defendant
Rama Matano Mwaurinda
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Release of Security Deposit Post Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the security deposit of Kshs 1.5 million should be released to the depositor after the determination of the appeal.
- 2 Whether the costs of the application should be borne by the applicants.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the security deposit of Kshs 1.5 million was made pursuant to a court order as a condition for stay of execution pending appeal. The appeal was subsequently filed and determined, with the Court of Appeal dismissing the defendants' appeal. As there is no longer any justification for retaining the security, the deposit should be released to the depositor, specifically the counsel on record for the defendants, for onward transmission to the owner. The court further held that since no other party participated in the application, it is fair and just for the applicants to bear their own costs. The orders were thus made for the release of the funds and for the defendants to...
Court Disposition
application allowed in part
Orders
- The money deposited pursuant to the court order of October 30, 2019, being Kshs 1,500,000.00, under receipt number 0045418 of November 26, 2019, be released to the depositor, MS J O Magolo & Company Advocates, for onward transmission to the owner.
- The defendants to bear their own costs in the application.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
33 paragraphs
Bahati Properties v Attorney General & 7 others (Environment & Land Case 31 of 2015) [2022] KEELC 14753 (KLR) (2 November 2022) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2022] KEELC 14753 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the Environment and Land Court at Mombasa
Environment & Land Case 31 of 2015
SM Kibunja, J
November 2, 2022
Between
Bahati Properties
Plaintiff
and
Attorney General
1st Defendant
Said M Mabavu
2nd Defendant
Anna W Dereva
3rd Defendant
Abdalla Mwachibulo Hema
4th Defendant
Fatuma S Nchizumo
5th Defendant
Omar Mashaka
6th Defendant
Mahfudh Mohamed Mwamtuku
7th Defendant
Rama Matano Mwaurinda
8th Defendant
Ruling
1. The defendants filed the notice of motion under certificate of urgency dated the August 5, 2022, seeking for the following;a.Spent.b.That this court be pleased to issue an order for reimbursement of the sum of Kshs 1. 5 million deposited as security to Umair Muhammad.c.That costs be in the cause.The application is supported by the affidavit sworn by Umair Muhammad on August 5, 2022, in which she among others deposed that the defendants had been ordered to deposit Kshs 1. 5 million by the court on October 30, 2019, as a condition for stay of execution, pending the appeal they intended to lodge. That she made the deposit to the court account through a transfer from her bank account on the defendants’ behalf on the November 26, 2019, and receipt number 0045418 was issued in the name of the defendants’ advocates. That the defendants subsequently lodged an appeal to the Court of Appeal, and a stay of order was issued. That the deponent has distanced herself from the matter since its conclusion and now seeks for the money deposited to be released back through her bank account at Absa Bank.
2. Mrs Kirui, the learned counsel for the defendants appeared before the court on the October 17, 2022 and made her submissions, in support of the application.
3. The court has carefully considered the application, perused the record and come to the following conclusions;a.That indeed, from the affidavit evidence tendered by the defendants and the record, the court delivered its judgement on the June 27, 2019 in favour of the plaintiff in terms of prayers (a) to (k) of the plaint, with a further order that each party bears their costs. That in the subsequent ruling of October 30, 2019, the defendants were granted stay on condition that they deposit Kshs 1. 5 million in 30 days.b.That the appeal was indeed filed in the Court of Appeal, being Civil Appeal number 141 of 2019. The copy of the Court of Appeal judgement in the record delivered on the June 4, 2021 confirms that the defendants’ appeal was dismissed with costs.c.That in view of the finding in (b) above that the appeal has been determined, then the court finds no reasonable cause to continue retaining the security deposited pursuant to the order of the October 30, 2019. That however, the deposit should be released to the depositor, the counsel on record for the defendants, in whose name the deposit receipt was issued for onward transmission to the owner.d.That in respect of the prayer for costs of this application, it is clear there is no other party who has participated in its hearing, and it is only fair the defendants, who are the applicants, do meet their own costs.
4. That flowing from the foregoing, the court orders as follows;a.That the money deposited pursuant to the court order of October 30, 2019, being Kshs 1,5000,000. 00, under receipt number 0045418 of November 26, 2019 be released to the depositor, MS J O Magolo & Company Advocates, for onward transmission to the owner.b.The defendants to bear their costs in the application.c.The file be closed.It is so ordered.
DATED AND VIRTUALLY DELIVERED THIS 2ND DAY OF NOVEMBER 2022. S M Kibunja, JELC MOMBASA.IN THE PRESENCE OF;PLAINTIFF ……………………………………………………DEFENDANTS …………………………………………………COUNSEL …………………………………………………………WILSON………………………………………………………………COURT ASSISTANT.S M Kibunja, JELC MOMBASA.