[2020] KEHC 2437 (KLR)
The court held that it had already determined an application for stay of execution of the judgment and decree, which was dismissed. As such, the court is functus officio and cannot entertain a fresh application seeking the same relief. The attempt to obtain a stay of execution and injunction after a final decision...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2020] KEHC 2437 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Kimutai Lelei; Respondent: Hosea Bittok; Respondent: The Management Committee Kapsaret Bondeni Self Help Group
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Eldoret
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Civil Suit 414 of 2012
- Procedural Posture
- Stay Application / Ruling on Application for Stay of Execution and Injunction Pending Appeal
- Outcome
- application dismissed with costs to the 1st defendant/respondent
- Legal Topics
- Stay of Execution, Eviction Orders, Functus Officio, Abuse of Process
- 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
Kimutai Lelei
Applicant
Hosea Bittok
Respondent
The Management Committee Kapsaret Bondeni Self Help Group
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Stay Application / Ruling on Application for Stay of Execution and Injunction Pending Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the court can grant a stay of execution of eviction orders after having previously dismissed a similar application.
- 2 Whether the court is functus officio regarding the issue of stay of execution.
- 3 Whether the present application amounts to an abuse of court process.
Ratio Decidendi
The court held that it had already determined an application for stay of execution of the judgment and decree, which was dismissed. As such, the court is functus officio and cannot entertain a fresh application seeking the same relief. The attempt to obtain a stay of execution and injunction after a final decision on the same issue is an abuse of the court process. The application was therefore found to lack merit and was dismissed with costs to the 1st defendant/respondent.
Court Disposition
application dismissed with costs to the 1st defendant/respondent
Orders
- The application dated 28th April 2020 is dismissed with costs to the 1st defendant/respondent.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
22 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE LAND AND ENVIRONMENT COURT
AT ELDORET
CIVIL SUIT NO. 414 OF 2012
KIMUTAI LELEI...........................................PLAINTIFF/APPLICANT
VERSUS
HOSEA BITTOK..............................1ST DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT
THE MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE KAPSARET
BONDENI SELF HELP GROUP.....2ND DEFENDANT/RESPONDET
RULING
This ruling is in respect of an application dated 28th April 2020 by the plaintiff/applicant seeking for the following orders:
a) That there be a stay of execution of the orders of eviction made on the 25th February, 2020 in Eldoret ELC. No. 414 of 2012 Kimutai Lelei vs Hosea Kibitok & another pending the hearing and determination of Eldoret Court of Appeal Civil Application No. 9 of 2020 Kimutai Lelei vs Hosea Kibitok.
b) That an injunction do issue against the 1st respondent restraining him whether by himself, his servants and/or agents from evicting the plaintiff or allienating or harassing him in the occupancy of land on PIONEER/NGERIA BLOCK 1(EATEC)113 pending the hearing and determination of Eldoret Court of Appeal Civil Application No. 9 of 2020 Kimutai Lelei vs Hosea Kibitok.
c) THAT the costs of the application be provided for.
Counsel agreed to canvass the application by way of written submissions which were duly filed.
ANALYSIS AND DETERMINATION
This is an application for stay of eviction orders granted on 25th February 2020. The applicant herein had made an application for stay of execution of the judgment and decree which ruling was delivered on 10th December 2019 and the same was dismissed with costs to the 1st defendant
Eviction orders are by their very nature execution of a judgment and comprehensively covered under Order 42 Rule 6. This makes the court functus officio as the court had rendered itself on the same issue of stay of execution. The applicant can move to the next level of the hierarchy of courts. Trying to have a second bite of the cherry cannot work in the court that is functus officio. This application amounts to abuse of court process.
I have considered the application, the submission of counsel and will therefore not write an elaborate ruling on this issue as the record speaks for itself. I find that the application lacks merit and is hereby dismissed with costs to the 1st defendant/respondent.
DATED and DELIVEREDatELDORETthis15TH DAY OFJULY, 2020
M. A. ODENY
JUDGE