[2005] KEHC 1076 (KLR)
The High Court held that its powers under section 78(2) of the Civil Procedure Act include the authority to discharge its own orders, such as the order for deposit of security for stay of execution. Since the appeal before the High Court had been concluded and the order for deposit was a precondition for stay...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2005] KEHC 1076 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: Peterson Githu; Appellant: Loise Wambui Githu; Appellant: Mary Wamahiga Wairoti; Appellant: Gladys Njeri Murage; Respondent: Elizabeth Wairimu Rindiri
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nyeri
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Civil Appeal 32 of 2002
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Post Judgment Application for Release of Deposited Funds
- Outcome
- Objection overruled; application for release of funds allowed.
- Legal Topics
- Stay of Execution, Release of Security, Appellate Powers, Deposit of Funds
- 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
Peterson Githu
Appellant
Loise Wambui Githu
Appellant
Mary Wamahiga Wairoti
Appellant
Gladys Njeri Murage
Appellant
Elizabeth Wairimu Rindiri
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Post Judgment Application for Release of Deposited Funds
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the High Court has jurisdiction under section 78(2) of the Civil Procedure Act to order release of funds deposited as a condition for stay of execution after the appeal is determined.
- 2 Whether the existence of a pending appeal to the Court of Appeal precludes the release of the deposited funds.
Ratio Decidendi
The High Court held that its powers under section 78(2) of the Civil Procedure Act include the authority to discharge its own orders, such as the order for deposit of security for stay of execution. Since the appeal before the High Court had been concluded and the order for deposit was a precondition for stay pending that appeal, the order was spent. The existence of a subsequent appeal to the Court of Appeal did not affect the status of the funds deposited pursuant to the High Court's order. Therefore, the objection by the respondent was overruled, and the funds were ordered to be released to the appellants' advocate.
Court Disposition
Objection overruled; application for release of funds allowed.
Orders
- The amount of Kshs.20,000/= deposited by the appellants in an interest earning account pursuant to orders made on 6th May 2002 be forthwith released to the appellants’ advocate on record.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
21 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NYERI Civil Appeal 32 of 2002
1. PETERSON GITHU )
2. LOISE WAMBUI GITHU )
3. MARY WAMAHIGA WAIROTi)
4. GLADYS NJERI MURAGE ).…............................................. APPELLANTS
VERSUS
ELIZABETH WAIRIMU RINDIRI …………………...…………….. RESPONDENT
(Appeal from the original judgment in Chief Magistrate’s Court at Nyeri in Civil Case No. 497 dated 1st February 2002 by Miss Regina Muriuki – R.M. – Nyeri
R U L I N G
By a notice of motion dated 17th September 2004 filed on the same date, the appellants are seeking orders under section 3A and section 78 (2) of the Civil Procedure Act for orders that the amount of Kshs.20,000/= deposited by the Appellants pursuant to the order of 6th May 2002 be released to the applicants through their advocate on record.
The order made on 6th May 2002 was for a stay of execution pending the final determination of the appeal in the High Court on condition that the applicants deposit a sum of Kshs.20,000/= in a joint interest earning A/C in the names of the advocates on record.
The appeal was subsequently heard by Hon. Khamoni J who delivered his judgment on 17th June 2004 allowing the appeal, hence the application to have the deposited amount released to the appellant.
Mr. Mburu has however opposed the application on behalf of the Respondents contending that the same is misconceived and incompetent, as the court had no authority under section 78 (2) of the Civil Procedure Act to make such an order. He further submitted that the application for release of the money was frivolous as there was an appeal already filed before the court of appeal which was pending and therefore an order for release of the money would be premature.
I am unable to understand the drift of Mr. Mburu’s argument as section 78 (2) of the civil Procedure Act merely gives an appellate court additional powers to perform “as nearly as may be the same duties as are conferred and imposed by this Act on courts of original jurisdiction.” I do not see how this power derogates from this court’s powers to discharge orders made by itself.
It is evident that the order for deposit of Kshs.20,000/= was a precondition for staying execution of the decree pending the hearing of the appeal lodged by the appellant in this court. That appeal having been disposed off, the order is spent. It cannot be affected by the appeal filed in the court of appeal by the Respondent.
I therefore overrule the objection raised by the respondent and order that the amount of Kshs.20,000/= deposited by the appellant in an interest earning account pursuant to orders made on the 6th May 2002 be forthwith released to the appellants’ advocate on record.
Those shall be the orders of this court.
Dated signed and delivered this 23rd day of November 2005.
H. M. OKWENGU
JUDGE