[2021] KEELC 2778 (KLR)
The court found that the appellant had failed to comply with the conditional order requiring deposit of Kshs.500,000 as security for the stay of execution. Compliance with such conditions is mandatory for the continued benefit of a stay order. The court held that the respondent's application to dismiss the stay...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2021] KEELC 2778 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: Jacob Njeru Karuku; Respondent: Njagi Njuguna
- Court
- Environment and Land Court
- Court Station
- Environment and Land Court at Chuka
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Environment and Land Appeal E003 of 2021
- Procedural Posture
- Stay Application / Ruling on Interim Stay Pending Appeal
- Outcome
- application dismissed; conditional stay vacated; costs to respondent
- Legal Topics
- Stay of Execution, Security for Costs, Eviction Orders, Appeal Procedure
- 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
Jacob Njeru Karuku
Appellant
Njagi Njuguna
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Stay Application / Ruling on Interim Stay Pending Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the appellant is entitled to a stay of execution of the lower court's ruling pending appeal.
- 2 Whether failure to deposit security as ordered warrants dismissal of the stay application.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the appellant had failed to comply with the conditional order requiring deposit of Kshs.500,000 as security for the stay of execution. Compliance with such conditions is mandatory for the continued benefit of a stay order. The court held that the respondent's application to dismiss the stay application was meritorious due to the appellant's non-compliance. Consequently, the application for stay was dismissed, the conditional stay vacated, and costs awarded to the respondent. The court further directed the appellant to file and serve the record of appeal within 14 days and the respondent's advocate to serve the orders issued upon the appellant's advocate within 7 days.
Court Disposition
application dismissed; conditional stay vacated; costs to respondent
Orders
- Application dated 2.6.2021 is dismissed; conditional stay of execution stands vacated; costs awarded to the respondent.
- The appellant is directed to file and serve the record of appeal within 14 days of the ruling.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
33 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE ENVIRONMENT AND LAND COURT
AT CHUKA
CHUKA ELC APPEAL CASE NO. E003 OF 2021
JACOB NJERU KARUKU.............................................................................APPELLANT
VERSUS
NJAGI NJUGUNA.......................................................................................RESPONDENT
RULING
1. This application is dated 2nd June, 2021 and it has been brought to court under Article 159 of the Constitution of Kenya, 2010, Sections 1A, 1B and 3A of Civil Procedure Act, Cap 21, Laws of Kenya, Order 42 Rule 6 and Order 51 Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Rules, 2010, the inherent powers of the court and all other enabling provisions of the law.
2. The application seeks the following orders:
1. THAT this Application be heard ex parte in the first instance in view of its urgent nature.
2. THAT pending the hearing and determination of the Application dated 12th April, 2021 this Honourable Court be pleased to Order stay of execution of the Ruling delivered by the Honourable N Kahara (SRM) on 8th April, 2021 in Chuka LDT 15 of 2009 and any Order arising therefrom.
3. THAT the costs of this Application be provided for.
3. The application is supported by the affidavit of Nimrod Matunda, the applicant’s advocate, and has the following grounds:
1. ON11th April, 2021 the Honourable Court considered the Notice of Motion dated 12th April, 2021 and fixed the same for directions on 14th June, 2021.
2. UNFORTUNATELY, the Respondent herein has made deliberate plans, obtained eviction orders from the lower court and has embarked on a mission to evict the Appellant on 8th June, 2021 in order to circumvent and defeat the hearing of the Application dated 12th April, 2021 and ultimately render the intended Appeal nugatory.
3. THE Appellant is therefore justifiably apprehensive that unless the Honourable Court intervenes now and grants an Order of Staying the planned eviction, the Respondent will proceed to execute against the Appellant on 8th June, 2021 and evict him thereby occasioning the Appellant substantial loss and rendering the Appeal an academic exercise.
4. THERE is real and imminent danger that unless prayer 3 on the Notice of Motion dated 12th April, 2021 as sought is granted in the first instance, the Respondent shall execute before the filed Appeal is heard and determined thereby exposing the Appellant to irreparable loss and damage and further render the appeal nugatory and merely academic.
5. THEAppellant therefore seeks the intervention of the Honourable Court, to stay in the interim the intended eviction in term of prayer 3 on the substantive application dated 12th April, 2021 until when parties appear before court on 14th June, 2021 for further directions.
6. IFthe Honourable court does not intervene as a matter of urgency and stay the implementation of the impugned ruling the law of the jungle will take precedent whereof the appellant will be evicted.
7. THIS Application is not frivolous; it is arguable and has been brought without unreasonable delay.
4. When the matter came up for directions on 28. 6.2021, the applicant and his advocate were not in court. The respondent’s advocate, Mr. Muthomi Gitari, told the court that this court had on 7. 6.2021 granted the appellant a conditional stay of execution on condition that the appellant deposited with court, as security the sum of Kshs.500,000/= within 14 days. Mr. Gitari brought to the attention of the court this court’s Deputy Registrar’s letter dated 24th June, 2021 in which she confirmed that the appellant had not complied with the apposite court’s order. For this reason, he asked the court to dismiss the appellant’s application.
5. I find as a fact that the appellant has not complied with the court order that a sum of Kshs.500,000/= being deposit for security be deposited with court within the stipulated time.
6. In the circumstances, I find the application by the respondent’s advocate that the application be dismissed is meritorious. The following orders are issued:
a) Application dated 2. 6.2021 is dismissed with the effect that the conditional stay of execution stands vacated and costs are awarded to the respondent.
b) The Appellant is directed to file and serve the record of Appeal within 14 days of today.
c) As he has undertaken, Mr. Muthomi, the respondent’s advocate to serve the orders issued today upon the appellant’s advocate within 7 days of today.
d) Directions on 26. 7.2021.
DELIVERED IN OPEN COURT AT CHUKA THIS 28TH DAY OF JUNE, 2021 IN THE PRESENCE OF:
CA: Ndegwa
Muthomi Gitari for the Respondent
P. M. NJOROGE,
JUDGE.