[2012] KEHC 4468 (KLR)
The court found that the order issued by the lower court was a negative order, as it merely dismissed the applicant's suit and did not direct any positive act or execution. Consequently, there was nothing to stay or execute under section 38 of the Civil Procedure Act. The applicant failed to demonstrate that the...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2012] KEHC 4468 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: James Mwangi Njuki; Respondent: Kerugoya/Kutus Municipal Council
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Embu
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Civil Appeal 87 of 2011
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Ruling on Stay Application Pending Appeal
- Outcome
- application dismissed with costs
- Legal Topics
- Stay of Execution, Injunctions, Negative Orders, Access Roads, Security for Costs
- 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
James Mwangi Njuki
Appellant
Kerugoya/Kutus Municipal Council
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Ruling on Stay Application Pending Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether a stay of execution can be granted where the lower court issued a negative order (dismissal of suit).
- 2 Whether the applicant has demonstrated that the appeal will be rendered nugatory or that substantial loss will occur if stay is not granted.
- 3 Whether the application for injunctive relief is properly before the court without citing legal provisions.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the order issued by the lower court was a negative order, as it merely dismissed the applicant's suit and did not direct any positive act or execution. Consequently, there was nothing to stay or execute under section 38 of the Civil Procedure Act. The applicant failed to demonstrate that the appeal would be rendered nugatory or that he would suffer substantial loss if stay was not granted. The evidence showed that the structures on the plot had already been demolished, and in the event of a successful appeal, the court could restore the applicant to his previous position. The application was therefore without merit and dismissed with costs.
Court Disposition
application dismissed with costs
Orders
- The application for stay is dismissed with costs to the respondent.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
25 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT
AT EMBU
Civil Appeal 87 of 2011
JAMES MWANGI NJUKI…….………..………………….……………APPELLANT
VERSUS
KERUGOYA/KUTUS MUNICIPAL COUNCIL…....………………. RESPONDENT
(AN APPEAL FROM THE JUDGMENT DELIVERED ON 28TH JUNE 2011 BY HON. E.M. NYAGA AT KERUGOYA SENIOR RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT RMCC NO. 16 OF 2010)
R U L I N G
This is the Notice of Motion dated 1/8/2011. It does not indicate under what provisions of the law it is made. In it the Applicant is seeking an Order of stay stopping the Respondent from creating an access road through the Applicant’s plot No.41 Kutus Town pending the hearing of this pending Appeal.
He says if stay is not granted his appeal which raises serious issues will be rendered nugatory if it succeeds. He is willing to deposit security for costs.
He also filed a supporting affidavit. He has filed an Appeal No.87 of 2011 out of the Judgment in Kerugoya R.M.C.C. No.16 of 2010.
The Respondent filed a replying affidavit, through it’s Town Clerk and states that the Applicant won’t suffer any loss as the road already exists on the ground. And that the Order he seeks to stay is a negative one as spelt out in section 38 Civil Procedure Act.
Both Counsels orally submitted reiterating what had been raised in the affidavits filed. The Applicant’s Counsel submitted that the application is not resjudicata as what they sought before the lower court is different. Secondly they were not seeking stay of the dismissal orders.
There is an Appeal pending before this court, arising from Kerugoya RMCC NO.16 of 2010. The Appellant/Applicant had filed a suit in the lower court seeking an injunction to bar the Respondents from entering, cutting or constructing an access road through the Plaintiff’s plot No.41 Kutus Old Town.
After hearing both parties the learned trial Magistrate dismissed the Applicant’s suit which in effect means the prayer for an injunction was not allowed by the court. What the Applicant is asking for now is a similar order. And he chose not to indicate under what provisions of the law he is moving the court. Be it as it may it’s clear from what is before me that the Applicant is seeking injunctive orders. It can not be a stay order because the lower court did not issue any Decree or Order for execution. The suit was dismissed hence a negative order was issued. So ideally there is nothing to stay. There is nothing to execute as envisaged under section 38 Civil Procedure Act.
On the basis of the holding in the case ofESTATES LTD –VS- KENYA POSTS & TELCOMMUNICATION CORPORATION AND ANOTHER C.A. NO. NAIROBI 162/04 I do find that the Order issued herein is a negative Order and cannot therefore be stayed. The Applicant has not demonstrated that if the Order sought is not granted the Appeal will be rendered nugatory and/or that he will suffer substantial loss.
The evidence before the lower court is that the structures standing on the plot had already been demolished. In the event of a successful appeal the court will make the necessary Orders to put the Applicant back in the position he was in prior to the filing of the suit.
I therefore do find that the application lacks in merit and is hereby dismissed, with costs.
DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED AT EMBU THIS 9th DAY OF MAY 2012
H.I. ONG’UDI
JUDGE
In the presence of:
Mr. Karanja for Mr. Kariuki for Respondent
Njue C/c