[2024] KEELC 7239 (KLR)
The court found that since the 1st defendant's bill of costs had been taxed and a certificate of costs issued, and the application for judgment on the taxed costs was unopposed, judgment should be entered for the 1st defendant for the amount specified in the certificate of costs. However, since the original judgment...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2024] KEELC 7239 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Simon Kihohia Ndiritu & 100 others; Defendant: Abdi Sheikh Ahmed; Defendant: Taraguri Lalitchandra Pandit; Defendant: Dhruv Lalitchandra Pandit; Defendant: Abraham Muriuki Munene
- Court
- Environment and Land Court
- Court Station
- Environment and Land Court at Nairobi
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Environment and Land Case Civil Suit 98 of 2010
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Suit / Ruling on Application for Judgment on Taxed Costs
- Outcome
- Application allowed in part; judgment entered for the 1st defendant for taxed costs only, interest denied.
- Judges
- LN Mbugua
- Legal Topics
- Taxation of Costs, Certificate of Costs, Unopposed Applications, Interest on Costs
- 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
Simon Kihohia Ndiritu & 100 others
Plaintiff
Abdi Sheikh Ahmed
Defendant
Taraguri Lalitchandra Pandit
Defendant
Dhruv Lalitchandra Pandit
Defendant
Abraham Muriuki Munene
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Civil Suit / Ruling on Application for Judgment on Taxed Costs
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether judgment should be entered for the 1st defendant against the plaintiffs for the taxed costs as per the certificate of costs.
- 2 Whether the 1st defendant is entitled to interest at 14% per annum from the specified date.
- 3 Whether costs of the application should be awarded.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that since the 1st defendant's bill of costs had been taxed and a certificate of costs issued, and the application for judgment on the taxed costs was unopposed, judgment should be entered for the 1st defendant for the amount specified in the certificate of costs. However, since the original judgment did not award interest on costs and had not been reviewed, the request for interest was denied. The application was allowed only to the extent of entering judgment for the taxed costs and awarding costs of the application.
Court Disposition
Application allowed in part; judgment entered for the 1st defendant for taxed costs only, interest denied.
Orders
- Judgment is entered for the 1st defendant against the plaintiffs for Ksh. 415,000 as per the certificate of costs issued on 4th September 2024.
- Costs of the application are awarded to the 1st defendant.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
28 paragraphs
Ndiritu & 100 others v Ahmed & 3 others (Environment and Land Case Civil Suit 98 of 2010) [2024] KEELC 7239 (KLR) (29 October 2024) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2024] KEELC 7239 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the Environment and Land Court at Nairobi
Environment and Land Case Civil Suit 98 of 2010
LN Mbugua, J
October 29, 2024
Between
Simon Kihohia Ndiritu & 100 others
Plaintiff
and
Abdi Sheikh Ahmed
1st Defendant
Taraguri Lalitchandra Pandit
2nd Defendant
Dhruv Lalitchandra Pandit
3rd Defendant
Abraham Muriuki Munene
4th Defendant
Ruling
1. Judgment was delivered in this matter on 8. 12. 2022 where plaintiff’s suit was dismissed with costs to the defendants. Thereafter a ruling on taxation on costs was delivered on 29. 8.2024 wherein, the 1st defendants bill of costs was taxed at Ksh. 415,000, while that of the 2nd, 3rd and 4th defendants was taxed at Ksh. 404,360.
2. Before me is the 1st defendant’s Notice of Motion application dated 1. 10. 2024 seeking the following orders;i.Judgment be entered for the 1st Defendant/Applicant against the Plaintiffs/Respondents for the sum of Kshs.415,000/= (Kenya Shillings Four Hundred and fifteen thousand only) as per the Certificate of Costs issued on 4th September 2024. ii.The 1st Defendant/Applicant be awarded interest at the rate of 14% per annum from 27th May, 2023 (being the 30th day from the date on which the bill of costs was served upon the Plaintiffs/Respondents).iii.Costs of this application be provided for.”
3. The applicant contends that vide the ruling of the Deputy Registrar dated 29. 8.2024, their bill of costs was taxed at Ksh. 415,000 and that a certificate of costs was subsequently issued on 4. 9.2024.
4. The application was served but no response was filed. Should the court then proceed to allow the application? In the Supreme Court of Kenya case of Tullow Oil PLC & 3 Others v PS Ministry of Energy & 15 Others [2020] eKLR, the court had this to say in regard to an application which was not opposed;“In other circumstances, depending on its nature, where an application is unopposed, and the court sees merit in it, then it should be granted without much ado”.
5. There being a certificate of taxation issued by the Deputy Registrar, it follows then that judgment should be entered in terms set out in the aforementioned certificate.
6. The applicant also seeks interests at the rate of 14% per annum from 27. 5.2023. However in the judgment delivered on 8. 12. 2022, this court did not give an award on interests on any amount. The said judgment has not been reviewed, thus the orders sought in prayer 3 are dismissed.
7. In the end, the application dated 1. 10. 2024 is allowed in terms of prayer 2 and 4 only.
DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED AT NAIROBI THIS 29thDAY OF OCTOBER, 2024 THROUGH MICROSOFT TEAMS.LUCY N. MBUGUAJUDGEIn the presence of:-Namuturu holding brief for Khoumba for ApplicantsCourt assistant: Vena