[2023] KEELC 19056 (KLR)

[2023] KEELC 19056 (KLR)

The court found that the applicant failed to satisfy the mandatory requirements for grant of stay of execution under Order 42 Rule 6 of the Civil Procedure Rules. There was inordinate and unexplained delay in seeking to set aside the judgment and in applying for stay. The applicant did not provide tangible evidence of substantial loss or damage that would result from execution, nor did she specify the nature or value of the security offered. The court also noted the absence of any assurance from the applicant that she would not interfere with the suit land or undertake to deposit security commensurate with the value of the land or costs. Consequently, the application lacked merit and was...

Citation
[2023] KEELC 19056 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Evalyne Nkirote Gituma; Respondent: Gachuu M’nkarachie Gituma
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Meru
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Judgment Date
26 July 2023
Case Number
Environment and Land Appeal E031 of 2023
Procedural Posture
Environment and Land Appeal / Ruling on Application for Stay of Execution and Maintenance of Status Quo Pending Appeal
Outcome
application dismissed with costs
Judges
CK Nzili
Legal Topics
Stay of Execution, Status Quo Orders, Substantial Loss, Security for Due Performance, Delay in Application
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Land and Property Stay of Execution Status Quo Orders Substantial Loss Security for Due Performance Delay in Application

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Evalyne Nkirote Gituma

Applicant

Gachuu M’nkarachie Gituma

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Environment and Land Appeal / Ruling on Application for Stay of Execution and Maintenance of Status Quo Pending Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant has satisfied the conditions for grant of stay of execution pending appeal under Order 42 Rule 6 of the Civil Procedure Rules.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant is entitled to an order for maintenance of status quo in respect of LR No Nyayo/Sirimon Scheme/5754.
  3. 3 Whether the delay in seeking stay of execution and setting aside judgment was inordinate and unexplained.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant failed to satisfy the mandatory requirements for grant of stay of execution under Order 42 Rule 6 of the Civil Procedure Rules. There was inordinate and unexplained delay in seeking to set aside the judgment and in applying for stay. The applicant did not provide tangible evidence of substantial loss or damage that would result from execution, nor did she specify the nature or value of the security offered. The court also noted the absence of any assurance from the applicant that she would not interfere with the suit land or undertake to deposit security commensurate with the value of the land or costs. Consequently, the application lacked merit and was...

Court Disposition

application dismissed with costs

Orders

  • The application for stay of execution and maintenance of status quo is dismissed with costs.
  • The lower court file to be availed for mention on September 14, 2023.