[2023] KEELC 18103 (KLR)
The court held that the application for stay of proceedings before the lower court had already been considered and determined by the trial court, which granted a conditional stay. The appellants failed to comply with the conditions set by the lower court and instead filed a fresh application before the appellate...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2023] KEELC 18103 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: Robert Nderi Muriithi; Appellant: Antony Kariuki Muriithi; Appellant: Jeremiah Maganjo Muriithi; Respondent: Flora Njeri Muthike; Respondent: Nancy Wangui Ngari; Respondent: Jane Muthoni Zacharia
- Court
- Environment and Land Court
- Court Station
- Environment and Land Court at Kerugoya
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Environment and Land Appeal 21 of 2019
- Procedural Posture
- Environment and Land Appeal / Ruling on Application for Stay of Proceedings Pending Appeal
- Outcome
- application dismissed with costs to the respondents
- Judges
- JM Mutungi
- Legal Topics
- Stay of Proceedings, Jurisdiction of Courts, Preliminary Objection, Res Judicata
- 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
Robert Nderi Muriithi
Appellant
Antony Kariuki Muriithi
Appellant
Jeremiah Maganjo Muriithi
Appellant
Flora Njeri Muthike
Respondent
Nancy Wangui Ngari
Respondent
Jane Muthoni Zacharia
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Environment and Land Appeal / Ruling on Application for Stay of Proceedings Pending Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the High Court has jurisdiction to entertain a fresh application for stay of proceedings where the lower court has already determined a similar application.
- 2 Whether the present application is res judicata and an abuse of court process.
- 3 Whether the conditions for stay of proceedings imposed by the lower court were oppressive or warranted review.
Ratio Decidendi
The court held that the application for stay of proceedings before the lower court had already been considered and determined by the trial court, which granted a conditional stay. The appellants failed to comply with the conditions set by the lower court and instead filed a fresh application before the appellate court, rather than seeking a review or variation of the terms. The court found that it lacked jurisdiction to entertain a fresh application on the same issue, as the matter was res judicata and amounted to an abuse of court process. Consequently, the application was dismissed with costs to the respondents.
Court Disposition
application dismissed with costs to the respondents
Orders
- The Notice of Motion dated October 6, 2021 is dismissed with costs to the respondents.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
31 paragraphs
Muriithi & 2 others v Muthike & 2 others (Environment and Land Appeal 21 of 2019) [2023] KEELC 18103 (KLR) (21 June 2023) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2023] KEELC 18103 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the Environment and Land Court at Kerugoya
Environment and Land Appeal 21 of 2019
JM Mutungi, J
June 21, 2023
Between
Robert Nderi Muriithi
1st Appellant
Antony Kariuki Muriithi
2nd Appellant
Jeremiah Maganjo Muriithi
3rd Appellant
and
Flora Njeri Muthike
1st Respondent
Nancy Wangui Ngari
2nd Respondent
Jane Muthoni Zacharia
3rd Respondent
Ruling
1. The Appellant by a Notice of Motion application dated October 6, 2021 sought to have all further proceedings in SPMC Wang’uru ELC Case No. 6 of 2019 stayed pending the hearing and determination of the instant Appeal. The application was premised on the grounds set out on the body of the application.
2. Before the Lower Court, the Appellant raised a Preliminary Objectionthat the subordinate Court lacked the jurisdiction to deal with the matter before it as jurisdiction was vested in the Scheme Advisory Committee of the Mwea Irrigation Scheme under the provisions of the Irrigation Act. The appellant contended the Mwea Irrigation Scheme was not a party in the proceedings and that the Subordinate Court, could not properly adjudicate over the dispute as it lacked jurisdiction.
3. The subordinate court dismissed the preliminary objection vide a Ruling made on November 12, 2019. The appellant through an application dated March 10, 2020 before the trial court sought stay of proceedings of the lower court proceedings and on September 21, 2021, the lower court granted conditional stay of the proceedings before the lower court upon the appellant depositing a sum of Kshs 300,000/- within 14 days in a joint account of both Counsel for the parties. The appellant considered the terms attaching to the order for stay oppressive and consequently decided to make the present application for stay of proceedings before the lower court in this court.
4. The respondents opposed the appellants application through a replying affidavit sworn by Flora Njeri Muthike the 1st respondent on November 10, 2021. The respondents contended the appellants had made a similar application before the trial court and had been granted stay on condition that they deposit security for mesne profit which they failed to satisfy. the respondents contended that the appellants did not appeal against the order for conditional stay and argued that this court lacked the jurisdiction to entertain an application that was similar to the one that had already been determined by the trial court.
5. The parties canvassed the application dated 6/10/2021 by way of written submissions. The applicant’s submissions dated December 1, 2021 were filed on December 3, 2021. The Respondents submissions dated November 30, 2021 were filed on the same date. I have carefully considered the application and the submissions of the parties. It is clear the appeal before the court relates to the Ruling delivered by the trial court dismissing the preliminary objection that the trial court lacked the jurisdiction to handle the matter before it. That Ruling was delivered on November 12, 2019. The Appellant filed a Memorandum of Appeal on December 10, 2019. Other than the extracted order affirming the preliminary objection dated February 18, 2019 was dismissed with costs to the plaintiffs, the copy of the Ruling and/or the pleadings were not annexed. The record of Appeal has equally not been filed. In the premises on the basis of the material now before the court, it is not possible to determine what the issues in the suit before the lower court were and/or affirm what issues were considered and determined in the Ruling delivered on November 12, 2019.
6. Admittedly, the Appellants following the dismissal of their preliminary objection, applied for stay of proceedings of the matter before the subordinate court and the trial court duly granted stay of the proceedings albeit on the condition that the appellants do within a period of 14 days from the date of the Ruling delivered on September 21, 2021 deposit the sum of Kshs 300,000/- in a joint account of both Counsels on record for the parties. There was no compliance with that condition and instead the appellants filed the present application before this court.
7. The present application does not seek a review and/or variation of the terms of the conditional stay of proceedings granted by the trial court. The application is a fresh application for stay of proceedings before the lower court. The lower court has already decided and granted stay of proceedings on terms which the appellants have failed to satisfy. The application for stay of proceedings having beenconsidered and determined by the lower court, this court lacks the jurisdiction to consider a similar application. the present application is res judicata and is brought in abuse of the court process.
8. I accordingly find no merit in the Notice of Motion dated October 6, 2021. I dismiss the same with costs to the Respondents.
RULING DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED VIRTUALLY AT KERUGOYA THIS 21STJUNE 2023. J. M. MUTUNGIJUDGE