[2000] KEHC 201 (KLR)
The court found that since the Court of Appeal had struck out the notice of appeal, there was no longer any pending appeal. Consequently, the stay of execution previously granted had been overtaken by events. In the absence of a valid stay or pending appeal, the applicant was entitled to execute the order issued on...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2000] KEHC 201 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Benrose Fast Food; Defendant: Muranga Properties Ltd
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- ? 1424 of 1997
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Suit / Ruling on Chamber Summons for Execution
- Outcome
- application allowed
- Legal Topics
- Stay of Execution, Appeals Struck Out, Execution of Judgment
- 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
Benrose Fast Food
Plaintiff
Muranga Properties Ltd
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Civil Suit / Ruling on Chamber Summons for Execution
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the stay of execution should be lifted given that the notice of appeal has been struck out.
- 2 Whether the applicant is entitled to execution of the order dated 16.10.1997.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that since the Court of Appeal had struck out the notice of appeal, there was no longer any pending appeal. Consequently, the stay of execution previously granted had been overtaken by events. In the absence of a valid stay or pending appeal, the applicant was entitled to execute the order issued on 16.10.1997. The court therefore allowed the application as prayed in the Chamber Summons dated 25.5.2000.
Court Disposition
application allowed
Orders
- Application allowed as per prayers 1, 2, 3, and 4 of the Chamber Summons dated 25.5.2000.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
10 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI
CIVIL SUIT NO. 1424 OF 1997BENROSE FAST FOOD………...……..…………………………………..PLAINTIFF-VERSUS-MURANGA PROPERTIES LTD……....….…………………………..DEFENDANT
RULING
In this application which is by Chamber Summons the applicant is asking for the Orders prayed in the application. The grounds in support are that the Stay of Execution which had been granted has been overtaken by the events on 17. 5.2000 the Court of Appeal struck out the Notice of Appeal so that in reality there is no pending appeal.
There being no stay of execution and there being no appeal filed there would be no excuse to deny the applicant his right contained in the Order of 16. 10. 1997.
I allow the application as per prayers 1,2,3, and 4 of the Chamber Summons dated 25. 5.2000.
Dated and delivered this 2nd October, 2000.
KASANGA MULWA
JUDGE