[2024] KEELC 5718 (KLR)
The court found that granting a stay at this interlocutory stage would be prejudicial to the administration of justice and would amount to delivering the substantive ruling in advance. Given the parties' disagreement over the current ground and registration status of the suit parcels, and with several substantive...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2024] KEELC 5718 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Joseph Ndichu Kiniu; Defendant: Ann Wairimu Ndungu and Stanley Ndungu Murigi Bothe t/a Annrose Nursery and Primary School; Defendant: Embakasi Ranching Company Ltd; Objector: Susan Wanjiru Ndung’u
- Court
- Environment and Land Court
- Court Station
- Environment and Land Court at Nairobi
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Environment & Land Case 179 of 2009
- Procedural Posture
- Environment and Land Case / Interlocutory Ruling on Oral Application for Stay Pending Determination of Execution Related Applications
- Outcome
- Status quo order granted; oral application for stay declined.
- Judges
- LN Mbugua
- Legal Topics
- Execution of Judgment, Stay of Execution, Status Quo Orders, Objector Proceedings
- 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
Joseph Ndichu Kiniu
Plaintiff
Ann Wairimu Ndungu and Stanley Ndungu Murigi Bothe t/a Annrose Nursery and Primary School
Defendant
Embakasi Ranching Company Ltd
Defendant
Susan Wanjiru Ndung’u
Objector
Procedural Posture
Environment and Land Case / Interlocutory Ruling on Oral Application for Stay Pending Determination of Execution Related Applications
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether a stay of execution should be granted pending determination of the seven pending applications relating to execution or stay of execution.
- 2 Whether the court should maintain the status quo or grant the oral application for stay.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that granting a stay at this interlocutory stage would be prejudicial to the administration of justice and would amount to delivering the substantive ruling in advance. Given the parties' disagreement over the current ground and registration status of the suit parcels, and with several substantive applications pending determination, the court held that the appropriate course is to preserve the prevailing status quo as at the date of the ruling. This ensures that neither party gains an unfair advantage or suffers prejudice before the court has had the opportunity to fully consider and rule on the pending applications relating to execution and stay of execution.
Court Disposition
Status quo order granted; oral application for stay declined.
Orders
- The prevailing status quo as at 29.7.2024 shall be maintained until the court delivers its ruling on the seven pending applications on 24.10.2024.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
26 paragraphs
Kiniu v Ann Wairimu Ndungu and Stanley Ndungu Murigi Bothe t/a Annrose Nursery and Primary School & another; Ndung’u (Objector) (Environment & Land Case 179 of 2009) [2024] KEELC 5718 (KLR) (29 July 2024) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2024] KEELC 5718 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the Environment and Land Court at Nairobi
Environment & Land Case 179 of 2009
LN Mbugua, J
July 29, 2024
Between
Joseph Ndichu Kiniu
Plaintiff
and
Ann Wairimu Ndungu and Stanley Ndungu Murigi Bothe t/a Annrose Nursery and Primary School
1st Defendant
Embakasi Ranching Company Ltd
2nd Defendant
and
Susan Wanjiru Ndung’u
Objector
Ruling
1. On 23. 6.2022, this court rendered judgment for the Plaintiff, granting him ownership of Plot No. A69 and A70 mapped out and demarcated as LR No. Block 105 (Embakasi Ranching) /1927 and LR No. Block 105 (Embakasi Ranching)/1928. As things stand, there are 7 pending applications in the matter relating to execution or stay of execution of the aforementioned judgment. The ruling thereof is slated for delivery on 24. 10. 2024.
2. When the matter came up on 22. 7.202 for directions on the prosecution of the various applications, counsel for the 1st Defendant and objector orally sought a stay order pending the hearing and determination of the various applications. The prayer is unopposed by counsel for the 2nd Defendant, but opposed by counsel for the Plaintiff.
3. There are accusations and counter accusations with the plaintiff averring that the orders given by Judge Angote on 7. 3.2024 were not orders of stay, but orders of status –quo which were not extended on 7. 5.2024. Thus the plaintiff went ahead and executed the decree by evicting the people on the ground on 10. 7.2024 and the registration status is that titles were issued in the Plaintiff’s name for both parcels.
4. The 1st Defendant and Objector denies that eviction has taken place and contends that Susan Ndu’ngu who had filed objector proceedings which are pending determination is the registered proprietor of the suit parcel as per the official search.
5. The substantive issues relating to execution and stay of execution of the courts judgment shall be determined in a ruling slated for delivery on 24. 10. 2024. The parties are not in agreement as to what the ground and registration status of the two suit parcels are post judgment. It is the finding of this court that delving into the question of stay at this stage would in essence be prejudicial to the administration of justice as it would be tantamount to delivery of the ruling scheduled on 24. 10. 2024 in piecemeal and in advance.
6. The appropriate order to give is the maintenance of status-quo as at now. Thus an order is hereby issued to the effect that the prevailing status-quo as at 29. 7.2024 shall be maintained until the court delivers its ruling on the 7 pending applications on 24. 10. 2024.
DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED AT NAIROBI THIS 29THDAY OF JULY, 2024 THROUGH MICROSOFT TEAMS.LUCY N. MBUGUAJUDGEIn the presence of:-Outa for 1st Defendant and the ObjectorNjoroge Ng’ang’a for PlaintiffsCourt assistant: Edde