[2016] KEELC 1077 (KLR)
The court found no merit in the plaintiff's application for adjournment. The judge held that the existence of an appeal does not automatically stay proceedings and that the plaintiff had already been given sufficient time to file additional documents. In balancing the interests of justice and the need for...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2016] KEELC 1077 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Kenya Agricultural Research Institute (K.A.R.I); Defendant: Farah Ali, Chairman Isahaki Self Help Group (sued on his own behalf and on behalf of the members of the group); Defendant: Commissioner of Lands
- Court
- Environment and Land Court
- Court Station
- Environment and Land Court at Nakuru
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Civil Case 23 of 2011
- Procedural Posture
- Land and Property Suit / Ruling on Application for Adjournment and Leave to Appeal
- Outcome
- Application for adjournment disallowed; leave to appeal granted; defendant to proceed with counterclaim first.
- Judges
- MA Silau
- Legal Topics
- Adjournment of Hearing, Leave to Appeal, Stay of Proceedings, Counterclaim 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
Kenya Agricultural Research Institute (K.A.R.I)
Plaintiff
Farah Ali, Chairman Isahaki Self Help Group (sued on his own behalf and on behalf of the members of the group)
Defendant
Commissioner of Lands
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Land and Property Suit / Ruling on Application for Adjournment and Leave to Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the plaintiff is entitled to an adjournment of the hearing of the main suit.
- 2 Whether the filing of an appeal operates as a stay of proceedings.
- 3 Whether leave to appeal the ruling of 5th November 2015 should be granted.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found no merit in the plaintiff's application for adjournment. The judge held that the existence of an appeal does not automatically stay proceedings and that the plaintiff had already been given sufficient time to file additional documents. In balancing the interests of justice and the need for expeditious disposal, the court declined to adjourn the matter further. However, as an accommodation short of dismissing the suit, the court allowed the defendant, who has a counterclaim, to present their case first. Additionally, the court clarified that leave to appeal the ruling of 5th November 2015 was granted and should be deemed as having been given on that date.
Court Disposition
Application for adjournment disallowed; leave to appeal granted; defendant to proceed with counterclaim first.
Orders
- Application for adjournment is disallowed.
- Defendant with a counterclaim to present their case first.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
33 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE ENVIRONMENT AND LAND COURT OF KENYA
AT NAKURU
HCC 23 OF 2011
KENYA AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH INSTITUTE
(K.A.R.I)……………..…….................................................……..….PLAINTIFF
VERSUS
FARAH ALI, CHAIRMAN ISAHAKI SELF HELP GROUP(Sued on his
own behalf and on behalf of the members of the group...1st DEFENDANT
COMMISSIONER OF LANDS…................................………2ND DEFENDANT
RULING
1. This matter is listed today for hearing of the main suit. The date was taken by consent on 4th November 2015. Today, Mr Anyona for the plaintiff has sought adjournment basically on two grounds.
2. The first is that they have preferred an appeal against my ruling of 5th November 2015. The second is that they wish for more time to file additional statements and/or documents.
3. On the first reason, it is trite law that an appeal does not operate as a stay. The mere fact that there is an appeal is not enough to stay these proceedings.
4. On the second reason, I gave time to the plaintiff, which I consider to be enough to put its house in order. In fact I have literally bent over backwards in accommodating the plaintiff’s request for time to file additional documents and the record will bear me witness.
5. Counsels for the defendants have sacrificed a lot to be in court and the matter is certainly of great public importance. I have stated in earlier rulings that this is a suit that should be disposed of expeditiously.
6. On the above reasons, I see no merit in the application for adjournment and it is disallowed. The best accommodation I can give to the plaintiff ( instead of dismissing its suit) is to allow the defendant who has a counterclaim, to present their case first. The matter to proceed on that basis.
7. On perusal of the record, I note that there was an oral application for leave to appeal which was made on 5th November 2015. Probably due to an oversight, I may have overlooked recording that leave was granted. For the avoidance of doubt, leave to appeal my ruling of 5th November 2015 is given and he same be deemed as having been given on the same day, i.e. 5th November 2015.
8. I apologise for the oversight.
Dated, signed and delivered in open court at Nakuru this 1st day of February, 2016.
MUNYAO SILA
JUDGE
ENVIRONMENT & LAND COURT
AT NAKURU
In presence of:
Mr Anyona present holding brief for Mr Kanjama for plaintiff.
Mr Athuok present for 1st defendant
Mr Nguyo present for 2nd defendant
CA: Janet
MUNYAO SILA
JUDGE
ENVIRONMENT & LAND COURT
AT NAKURU