[2014] KEHC 252 (KLR)
The court found that the applicant's assertion of ignorance regarding the ruling's delivery was baseless, as the date for delivery had been fixed in open court in the presence of both advocates. The court held that there was no justification for granting leave to appeal or stay of execution, as the applicant failed...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2014] KEHC 252 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Isaac Samuel Kiriamburi; Respondent: James Kiritu M'Ituerandu
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Meru
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Environment and Land Appeal 120 of 2009
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Ruling on Application for Leave to Appeal and Stay
- Outcome
- application dismissed
- Judges
- FM Njoroge
- Legal Topics
- Leave to Appeal, Stay of Execution, Service of Ruling, Notice of Taxation
- 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
Isaac Samuel Kiriamburi
Applicant
James Kiritu M'Ituerandu
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Ruling on Application for Leave to Appeal and Stay
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the applicant was denied knowledge of the ruling date and delivery.
- 2 Whether leave to appeal should be granted in the circumstances.
- 3 Whether stay of execution of the lower court's orders is warranted.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the applicant's assertion of ignorance regarding the ruling's delivery was baseless, as the date for delivery had been fixed in open court in the presence of both advocates. The court held that there was no justification for granting leave to appeal or stay of execution, as the applicant failed to demonstrate any procedural irregularity or prejudice. Consequently, the application was dismissed.
Court Disposition
application dismissed
Orders
- The application dated 5th August, 2014 is dismissed with no order as to costs.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
26 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MERU
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 120 OF 2009
ISAAC SAMUEL KIRIAMBURI........................APPLICANT
VERSUS
JAMES KIRITU M'ITUERANDU....................RESPONDENT
R U L I N G
This application is dated 5th August, 2014, and seeks orders:
THATthis application be certified as urgent and be heard ex parte during the current vacation of the High Court.
THATthis honourable court be pleased to grant the applicant leave to appeal from its ruling dated 27. 5.2014.
THATthe leave so granted do operate as as stay of the orders of Maua CMCC No. 67 of 2009.
THATthe costs for and incidental to this application be costs in the intended appeal.
It is based on the following grounds:
THATthe ruling in H.C.C.A. No. 120 of 2009 was read without the knowledge of the applicant and his advocate.
THATthe appellant's advocate came to know of the ruling after he was served with a Notice of Taxation in Meru H.C.C.A No. 120 of 2009.
THATthe applicant is desirous of filing the intended appeal to protect his interests in the suit land.
THATthe respondent will not suffer any prejudice if this application is allowed.
Mr. Manases Kariuki holding brief for Mr. B. G. Kariuki for the applicant told the court that he was relying on the grounds on the face of the application and on the supporting affidavit of the applicant.
I note that ground 1 of the application is that the ruling in H.C.C.A No.120 of 2009 was read without the knowledge of the applicant and his advocate. Ground 2 states that the applicant's advocate came to know of the ruling after he was served with Notice of Taxation in Meru HCCA No.120 of 2009. On 27. 2.2014, Mr. B. G. Kariuki, for the Appellant, orally argued the Appellant's case. Mr. Ngunjiri for the respondent confuted his arguments. In the presence of both advocates, the Court fixed the date for delivery of the Ruling in the appeal as 27. 5.2014. The attempted contrivance by Mr. B. G. Kariuki for the appellant, who is the applicant herein, that he was all along unaware of the ruling has no basis at all.
In the circumstances the application dated 5th August, 2014 is DISMISSED with no order as to costs.
It is so ordered.
Delivered in Open Court at Meru this 13th day of August, 2014 in the presence of:
Cc. Daniel/Lilian
Manases Kariuki h/b B. G. Kariuki for the applicant
P. M. NJOROGE
JUDGE