[2023] KEHC 2613 (KLR)
The court found that the applicant had not demonstrated any sufficient grounds to warrant the setting aside of the taxation of costs or the grant of a stay of execution. The judge held that the process of taxation and execution was regular and proper. However, in the interests of justice and to allow the respondents...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2023] KEHC 2613 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: Alfred Anekeya Mang’ula T/A Alfabetty Enterprises; Respondent: Paul Indimuli; Respondent: Primus Holdings Limited
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Kakamega
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Civil Appeal 41 of 2020
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Ruling on Application for Stay of Execution and Setting Aside of Taxation
- Outcome
- Application dismissed with a 90-day grace period for settlement of the decree.
- Judges
- WM Musyoka
- Legal Topics
- Stay of Execution, Taxation of Costs, Setting Aside Orders
- 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
Alfred Anekeya Mang’ula T/A Alfabetty Enterprises
Appellant
Paul Indimuli
Respondent
Primus Holdings Limited
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Ruling on Application for Stay of Execution and Setting Aside of Taxation
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether there are sufficient grounds to set aside the taxation of costs.
- 2 Whether a stay of execution should be granted pending settlement of the decree.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the applicant had not demonstrated any sufficient grounds to warrant the setting aside of the taxation of costs or the grant of a stay of execution. The judge held that the process of taxation and execution was regular and proper. However, in the interests of justice and to allow the respondents an opportunity to settle the decree, the court granted them 90 days to pay the taxed costs in full, failing which the appellant would be at liberty to proceed with execution. The application for stay and setting aside was therefore dismissed, save for the grace period granted for settlement.
Court Disposition
Application dismissed with a 90-day grace period for settlement of the decree.
Orders
- Respondents granted 90 days to settle the decree in full.
- In default of payment within 90 days, appellant at liberty to levy execution.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
23 paragraphs
Mang’ula t/a Alfabetty Enterprises v Indimuli & another (Civil Appeal 41 of 2020) [2023] KEHC 2613 (KLR) (24 March 2023) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2023] KEHC 2613 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the High Court at Kakamega
Civil Appeal 41 of 2020
WM Musyoka, J
March 24, 2023
Between
Alfred Anekeya Mang’ula T/A Alfabetty Enterprises
Appellant
and
Paul Indimuli
1st Respondent
Primus Holdings Limited
2nd Respondent
(An appeal arising from the judgment and decree of the Hon. W Lopokoiyit, Resident Magistrate, in Kakamega SPMCCC No. 84 of 2012 of 30th July 2020)
Ruling
1. On 4th February 2022, I delivered a judgment herein. Costs were thereafter taxed at Kshs. 126, 375. 00, and a certificate to that effect issued. Execution ensued.
2. The Motion, dated 7th June 2022, was provoked by the execution. It seeks stay of execution, on grounds that the same is premature, and the setting aside of the taxation.
3. I heard the application on 18th July 2022. Mr. Balusi and Ms. Nafuye addressed me, on behalf of the parties.
4. I am not persuaded that any grounds exist for setting aside of the taxation of costs, and for stay of execution. The best I can do is to give the respondents 90 days to settle the decree in full, which I hereby do, in default of which the appellant shall have liberty to levy execution.
5. The application, dated 7th June 2022, is disposed of in those terms.
DATED, SIGNED and DELIVERED IN OPEN COURT AT KAKAMEGA THIS 24th DAY OF March 2023W. MUSYOKAJUDGEMr. Erick Zalo, Court Assistant.Mr. Balusi, instructed by Balusi & Smart, Advocates for the appellant.Mr. Munyendo, instructed by Akwala & Company, Advocates for the respondents.