[2021] KEHC 4507 (KLR)
The court found that the appellant was given multiple opportunities to comply with the order to produce the motor vehicle or provide an explanation for its absence but chose not to attend court or provide proof of sale. The appellant's conduct amounted to clear disobedience of court orders in the face of the court....
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2021] KEHC 4507 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: Kennedy Shikuku t/a Eshikoni Auctioneers; Respondent: Mohammed Iqbal
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Kakamega
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Civil Appeal 123 of 2019
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Judgment
- Outcome
- appeal dismissed with costs
- Judges
- DN Musyoka
- Legal Topics
- Contempt of Court, Compliance With Court Orders, Right to Be Heard
- 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
Kennedy Shikuku t/a Eshikoni Auctioneers
Appellant
Mohammed Iqbal
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the trial court erred in ordering the appellant's arrest before hearing his application dated 9th December 2019.
- 2 Whether the appellant was denied an opportunity to be heard before the arrest order was made.
- 3 Whether the appellant was in contempt of court for failing to comply with the order to produce the motor vehicle.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the appellant was given multiple opportunities to comply with the order to produce the motor vehicle or provide an explanation for its absence but chose not to attend court or provide proof of sale. The appellant's conduct amounted to clear disobedience of court orders in the face of the court. The trial court properly exercised its discretion in ordering the appellant's arrest for contempt, and the appellant could not claim to have been denied an opportunity to be heard when he willfully stayed away from court. The appeal was therefore dismissed for lack of merit.
Court Disposition
appeal dismissed with costs
Orders
- The appeal is dismissed with costs to the respondent.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
18 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT KAKAMEGA
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 123 OF 2019
(Being an appeal from the original ruling and order of Hon. TA Odera, Senior Principal Magistrate,
of 9th December 2019, in Mumias SPMCCC No. 145 of 2019)
KENNEDY SHIKUKU t/a ESHIKONI AUCTIONEERS..............................................APPELLANT
VERSUS
MOHAMMED IQBAL..................................................................................................RESPONDENT
JUDGMENT
1. Appeal herein arises from an order that was made on 9th December 2019 in Mumias SPMCCC No. 145 of 2019.
2. The events leading up to the order of 9th December 2019 began on 5th December 2019, when the court ordered that the appellant avails the motor vehicle, the subject of those proceedings, in court on 6th December 2019 at 9. 00 AM for it to be released to the respondent. On 6th December 2019, the appellant did not attend court, and the motor vehicle was not made available, instead the court was told by his advocate, that it had been sold. The court then ordered that the appellant attend court on 9th December 2019, with the motor vehicle or an explanation, ostensibly related to the alleged sale. Come 9th December 2019, the appellant did not attend court, and the court was informed by an advocate, that the appellant was before another court. The court then ordered that the application be heard at 12. 45 PM that day. That afternoon, the court ruled that appellant had refused to obey court orders, and ordered for his arrest.
3. In the grounds of appeal, as set out in the memorandum of appeal, dated 16th December 2019, the appellant complains that the court ordered his arrest of instead of hearing the application dated 9th December 2019, the court erred in holding that the order of 5th December 2019 had to be complied with first before the application dated 9th December 2019 was heard, the court ordered arrest before affording the appellant an opportunity to be heard and before contempt proceedings were conducted, among others.
4. The proceedings are very clear, that the court made an order, on 5th December 2019, for the appellant to avail a motor vehicle to court on a specified date, 6th December 2019. The appellant did not attend court on the due date, 6th December 2019, and did not avail the motor vehicle, instead the court was informed by his advocate that the motor vehicle had been sold, and no evidence of sale was provided. The court granted more time, for the appellant to appear before the court with the vehicle or an explanation on 9th December 2019. Come 9th December 2019, the appellant did not attend court, nor avail the vehicle, instead his advocate chose to file an application instead.
5. The record before me is clear that the appellant was defiant of the order. Orders were made for him to attend court. He chose not to attend court, but send his advocate instead. He chose not to produce the vehicle as ordered, and he made no effort to provide proof that he had sold it, hence it was not available for production. This was a clear case of disobedience of court orders on the face of the court. The court properly exercised discretion by ordering his arrest. He was given opportunity, several times, to come to court to explain himself, he chose to disobey the court by staying away. He cannot be heard to complain that he was not afforded an opportunity to be heard.
6. I find no merit whatsoever in the appeal before me, and I hereby dismiss it with costs. Court orders have to be complied with. More so by officers of the court, such as the appellant.
DELIVERED, DATED AND SIGNED IN OPEN COURT AT KAKAMEGA THIS 6th DAY OF AUGUST 2021
W. MUSYOKA
JUDGE