[2019] KEELC 3952 (KLR)
The court found that the appellant had serially disobeyed court orders requiring the deposit of security for stay of execution and failed to file the necessary appeal documents, including the Memorandum and Record of Appeal. The court, after reviewing the lower court file and considering the lack of compliance,...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2019] KEELC 3952 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: Benson Murithi Rithaa; Respondent: Stephen Muturi Nyaga
- Court
- Environment and Land Court
- Court Station
- Environment and Land Court at Chuka
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Environment and Land Appeal 06 of 2018
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Ruling on Preliminary Application for Stay and Summary Rejection of Appeal
- Outcome
- Appeal summarily rejected for non-compliance with court orders and lack of sufficient grounds.
- Legal Topics
- Stay of Execution, Appeal Procedure, Non Compliance With Court Orders
- 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
Benson Murithi Rithaa
Appellant
Stephen Muturi Nyaga
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Ruling on Preliminary Application for Stay and Summary Rejection of Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the appellant complied with court orders as a prerequisite for stay of execution.
- 2 Whether there were sufficient grounds to interfere with the lower court's decree or order.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the appellant had serially disobeyed court orders requiring the deposit of security for stay of execution and failed to file the necessary appeal documents, including the Memorandum and Record of Appeal. The court, after reviewing the lower court file and considering the lack of compliance, determined that there were no sufficient grounds to interfere with the decree or order of the lower court. Consequently, the appeal was summarily rejected under section 79B of the Civil Procedure Act.
Court Disposition
Appeal summarily rejected for non-compliance with court orders and lack of sufficient grounds.
Orders
- The appeal is summarily rejected.
- No costs are awarded.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
19 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE ENVIRONMENT AND LAND COURT AT CHUKA
CHUKA ELC CIVIL APPEAL CASE NO. 06 OF 2018
BENSON MURITHI RITHAA…...……………..……………...APPELLANT
VERSUS
STEPHEN MUTURI NYAGA……………………………..……RESPONDENT
RULING
1. This ruling concerns an intended appeal against the judgment of the Hon. J. M. Njoroge, CM, delivered on 4th July, 2018. Without filing a Memorandum of Appeal, the intended appellant filed an application brought to court by way of Notice of Motion seeking stay of execution issued pursuant to the apposite judgment.
2. Pending hearing of the application, and as is required by Order 42 Rule 6 (b) of the Civil Procedure Rules, the applicant was ordered, on 1st August, 2018 to deposit with court a sum of Kshs. Five Hundred Thousand (Kshs.500,000/=) within 14 days FAILING which the stay of execution granted by the court would automatically lapse. He did not comply with the court order.
3. On 20th November, 2018, the original order was varied and the applicant was directed to deposit with court a sum of Kshs. Four Hundred Thousand (Kshs.400,000/=) only within 14 days failing which the stay of execution granted would automatically lapse. The applicant did not comply with this court order.
4. On 16th January, 2019, the applicant had been directed to serve his Memorandum of Appeal upon the intended respondent and he was also ordered to file a record of appeal within 21 days. The parties were ordered to come to court for directions on 3rd April, 2019.
5. On 3rd April, 2019, the parties and their advocates did not come to court. Meanwhile, the file containing the proceedings in the lower court had been annexed to this court’s file. I have perused that file. When I juxtapose the apposite proceedings with the serial disobedience of this court’s orders, in accordance with section 79B of the Civil Procedure Act, I do certify that there is no sufficient ground for interfering with the decree, part of the decree or order intended to be appealed against.
6. I, therefore, summarily reject the appeal.
7. No costs are awarded.
Delivered in open court at Chuka this 3rd day of April, 2019 in the presence of:
CA: Ndegwa
Parties are not in court
P. M. NJOROGE,
JUDGE.