[2020] KEELC 3212 (KLR)

[2020] KEELC 3212 (KLR)

The court found that the application for execution of the decree was without merit because a stay of execution had already been granted by consent of the parties on 8th October 2019. Allowing the application would be contrary to the existing stay order. Therefore, the application dated 18th April 2019 was dismissed...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2020] KEELC 3212 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Mary Wanjiru Ndegwa; Defendant: Wandemi Developers Limited
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Nairobi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Environment & Land Case 666 of 2012
Procedural Posture
Notice of Motion / Ruling on Post Judgment Execution Application
Outcome
application dismissed with costs to the respondent
Judges
EO Obaga
Legal Topics
Execution of Decree, Transfer of Land, Stay of Execution
Source Language
en
Land and Property Civil Procedure Execution of Decree Transfer of Land Stay of Execution

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mary Wanjiru Ndegwa

Plaintiff

Wandemi Developers Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Notice of Motion / Ruling on Post Judgment Execution Application

  1. 1 Whether the court should order the directors of the defendant to execute transfer documents for LR No.27981/12 in favour of the plaintiff.
  2. 2 Whether the court should authorize the Deputy Registrar to execute transfer documents in default.
  3. 3 Whether the Chief Land Registrar should be directed to dispense with certain documents and rectify the register in favour of the plaintiff despite a pending stay of execution.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the application for execution of the decree was without merit because a stay of execution had already been granted by consent of the parties on 8th October 2019. Allowing the application would be contrary to the existing stay order. Therefore, the application dated 18th April 2019 was dismissed with costs to the respondent.

Court Disposition

application dismissed with costs to the respondent

Orders

  • The application dated 18th April 2019 is dismissed with costs to the respondent.