[2011] KEHC 1226 (KLR)
The court found that the applicants' repeated applications, including the present one seeking to pay the decretal sum by instalments, were incompetent and an abuse of the court process. The matter had already been determined in previous rulings, making it res judicata. Furthermore, the applicants lacked locus standi...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2011] KEHC 1226 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Charles K. Kipngok; Defendant: James Stephen Kiprutto A. Ngok (deceased, through sons/objectors)
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nakuru
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Civil Case 132 of 2006
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Case / Ruling on Objection Proceedings and Application to Pay Decretal Sum by Instalments
- Outcome
- application dismissed with costs
- Judges
- MJA Emukule
- Legal Topics
- Execution of Decrees, Res Judicata, Locus Standi, Abuse of 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
Charles K. Kipngok
Plaintiff
James Stephen Kiprutto A. Ngok (deceased, through sons/objectors)
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Civil Case / Ruling on Objection Proceedings and Application to Pay Decretal Sum by Instalments
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the applicants' objection proceedings and application to pay the decretal sum by instalments are competent in law.
- 2 Whether the matter is res judicata due to previous similar applications having been dismissed.
- 3 Whether the applicants have locus standi to bring the application regarding the subject properties.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the applicants' repeated applications, including the present one seeking to pay the decretal sum by instalments, were incompetent and an abuse of the court process. The matter had already been determined in previous rulings, making it res judicata. Furthermore, the applicants lacked locus standi as the properties in question did not belong to them. The court emphasized that the persistent filing of incompetent applications demonstrated disregard for the rule of law and the authority of court orders. Consequently, the application was dismissed with costs.
Court Disposition
application dismissed with costs
Orders
- The application dated and filed on 30th May 2011 is dismissed with costs.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
18 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA
AT NAKURU
CIVIL CASE NO. 132 OF 2006
CHARLES K. KIPNGOK…………………………..………………PLAINTIFF/RESPONDENT
VERSUS
JAMES STEPHEN KIPRUTTO A. NGOK…….......….……..……..DEFENDANT/APPLICANT
RULING
This is the third Ruling on substantially the same issue, objection proceedings to the sale of the judgment debtors, property known as Title No. Kericho/Kipchimchim/2248 and 2249 by the sons of the late James Stephen Kiprutto A. Ngok. Similarly applications were dismissed with in Rulings dated 7th May 2010 and 6th May 2011. And yet there is another application by the same Objectors, now disguised as an application to be allowed to pay the decretal sum by Shs 50,000/= per month until payment in full.
The application is technically incompetent, and is bad in law and should indeed be struck out as prayed by counsel for the Plaintiff/Respondent in his grounds of opposition dated and filed on 2nd June 2011.
The decree herein was issued by this court. So it cannot exercise the powers of a court to which a decree has been sent. Reference to Order XXI rule 22 of the former rules of procedure is incompetent. And reference to the courts power do substantial justice under Section 1A & 1B and Section 3A of the Civil Procedure Act is no more than abuse of the process of court. I do not think with the greatest to the feelings of members of the late Defendant's estate, it is either fair or just to go round the court in a circus over the same issue.
If the applicant could accept the loss of their father, and move on, what is there in a parcel of land which once under a decree of court is no more than a commodity for sale? The applicant's constant and persistent use of the process of the court is a clear demonstration that they have no respect for it unless, the orders are made in their favour. That is not how the rule of law works. The rule of law entails the recognition of other people's rights, and obedience to the orders of court.
The applicants have demonstrated by the multiplicity of quite incompetent applications that they wish to have no track with the rule of law, and obedience of court orders unless as observed above, the orders are in their favour.
I entirely agree with the Plaintiff's/Respondent's counsel's grounds of opposition that this matter is not onlyres judicata, but as a matter of law, the Applicants have no locus standi in this matter, the properties do not belong to them, as already observed, the application is incompetent and bad in law.
For those reasons the applicant's application dated and filed on 30th May 2011 is dismissed with costs.
Dated, signed and delivered at Nakuru this 10th day of June 2011
M. J. ANYARA EMUKULE
JUDGE