[2023] KECPT 777 (KLR)
The tribunal found that the applicant failed to prosecute the application for stay of execution and payment by installments, as no steps were taken after filing and service of the Notice of Motion. The applicant also failed to provide a concrete payment proposal. The tribunal emphasized the principle that litigation...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2023] KECPT 777 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Fransisca Obam; Respondent: Mater Sacco
- Court
- Cooperative Tribunal
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Tribunal Case 536 of 2017
- Procedural Posture
- Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Stay of Execution and Payment by Installments
- Outcome
- application dismissed with costs
- Judges
- BM Kimemia, J. Mwatsama, B Sawe, F Lotuiya, P. Gichuki, M Chesikaw, PO Aol
- Legal Topics
- Stay of Execution, Payment by Installments, Dismissal for Want of Prosecution
- 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
Fransisca Obam
Applicant
Mater Sacco
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Stay of Execution and Payment by Installments
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the applicant is entitled to a stay of execution pending determination of the application.
- 2 Whether the applicant should be granted leave to settle the decretal amount in installments.
- 3 Whether the application should be dismissed for want of prosecution.
Ratio Decidendi
The tribunal found that the applicant failed to prosecute the application for stay of execution and payment by installments, as no steps were taken after filing and service of the Notice of Motion. The applicant also failed to provide a concrete payment proposal. The tribunal emphasized the principle that litigation must be conducted expeditiously and that justice delayed is justice denied. As a result, the application was found to lack merit and was dismissed with costs, allowing the respondent to enjoy the fruits of the judgment.
Court Disposition
application dismissed with costs
Orders
- The application dated 15/10/2021 is dismissed with costs.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
22 paragraphs
Obam v Mater Sacco (Tribunal Case 536 of 2017) [2023] KECPT 777 (KLR) (31 August 2023) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2023] KECPT 777 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the Cooperative Tribunal
Tribunal Case 536 of 2017
BM Kimemia, Chair, J. Mwatsama, Vice Chair, B Sawe, F Lotuiya, P. Gichuki, M Chesikaw & PO Aol, Members
August 31, 2023
Between
Fransisca Obam
Claimant
and
Mater Sacco
Respondent
Ruling
1. The Application is brought vide a Notice of Motion dated 15/10/2021 and filed on 22/11/2021 under Certificate of Urgency dated 15/10/2021 filed on 22/11/2021. The Applicant sought the following orders;i.Spent.ii.that the honourable tribunal be pleased to order for stay of execution against the applicant by the 2nd respondent pending the hearing and determination of the application.iii.that the applicant be granted leave to settle the decretal amount of kshs. 354,039. 58 in installments until payment in full.iv.that the cost of this Application be in the cause.
2. The Applicant avers that the 1st Respondent has issued the Applicant with a proclamation notice that expires on 15/10/21. The Applicant avers that attempts were made to engage the Judgement Debtor for a payment proposal with an aim to agree on an instalment payment plan until full payment.
3. The Respondent/Claimant avers that he is not opposed to the Claimant/Respondent’s but have not stated the amount to pay in installments. Further, the Claimant/Respondent proposed to pay a down payment of Kshs. 200,000/= and the balance together with the costs and interests Kshs. 50,000/= annually until payment in full.
Analysis and Determination. 4. Parties were ordered to file Written Submissions but only the Respondent/Claimant filed theirs.
5. It should be noted that the Applicant/Respondent failed to prosecute their matter, in Thaithini Development Company Limited v Mombasa Water & Sewerage Company and Another [2002] eKLR the court held that the legal substratum for dismissal of suits for want of prosecution is founded on the principle that litigation must be expedited and concluded by parties who come to court for seeking justice. There should be no delay at all and based on legal maxims, Justice delayed is Justice denied.
6. Further the Respondent/Claimant should be allowed to enjoy the fruits of the judgement found in their favor. After filing and service of the Notice of Motion, the Applicant/Respondent did not take any steps to prosecute the Notice of Motion, nor did the Applicant/Respondent offer any payment proposal.We therefore find that the Application lacks merit.
Upshot. 7. From the foregoing, we find that the Application lacks merit and is therefore dismissed with costs.
RULING SIGNED, DATED AND DELIVERED VIRTUALLY AT NAIROBI THIS 31ST DAY OF AUGUST, 2023. Hon. Beatrice Kimemia Chairperson Signed 31. 8.2023Hon. J. Mwatsama Deputy Chairperson Signed 31. 8.2023Hon. Beatrice Sawe Member Signed 31. 8.2023Hon. Fridah Lotuiya Member Signed 31. 8.2023Hon. Philip Gichuki Member Signed 31. 8.2023Hon. Michael Chesikaw Member Signed 31. 8.2023Hon. Paul Aol Member Signed 31. 8.2023Tribunal Clerk JemimahHon. J. Mwatsama Deputy Chairperson Signed 31. 8.20