Siamito & 9 others v Kironua & 12 others (Civil Application E1116 of 2025) [2026] KECA 1278 (KLR) (3 July 2026) (Ruling)

Siamito & 9 others v Kironua & 12 others (Civil Application E1116 of 2025) [2026] KECA 1278 (KLR) (3 July 2026) (Ruling) Neutral citation: [2026] KECA 1278 (KLR) Republic of Kenya In the Court of Appeal at Nairobi Civil Application E1116 of 2025 SG Kairu, P Nyamweya & Katwa Kigen, JJA July 3, 2026 Between Leshoko Nkoneri Siamito 1st Applicant Saruni Mpapa Nakoyo 2nd Applicant Jackson Ntuyoyo Marasua 3rd Applicant Raigot Maseri 4th Applicant Joseph Karantei Nkonyek Onguan 5th Applicant Tobiko Shaankwa 6th Applicant Lekitony Saitoti 7th Applicant Setei Larmoi 8th Applicant Lemaron Mutente Nkaiserri 9th Applicant Nkaitole Maroro 10th Applicant and Daniel Koikai Kironua 1st Respondent Parmeres Nina 2nd Respondent Koileken Sempeta 3rd Respondent Shapapa Mpapa 4th Respondent Meibuko Moshila 5th Respondent Tobiko Nkulana 6th Respondent Joshua Lengete Sarbabi 7th Respondent Mashipai Tirati 8th Respondent Sinkale Ole Kanore (1st – 9th Respondents Suing as the Representatives of Mailua Group Ranch) 9th Respondent The Director, Land Adjudication and Settlement 10th Respondent Mr. Stephen G. Mayaka, Registrar of Group Representatives in the Directorate of Land Adjudication 11th Respondent Kajiado Land Adjudication & Settlement Officer 12th Respondent The Honourable Attorney General 13th Respondent (Being an application for injunction and stay of execution of the Judgment and Decree of the Environment and Land Court of Kenya at Kajiado (L. Komingoi, J.) dated 17{{^th}} July 2025) in ELC JR Case No. E005 of 2023) Ruling 1.In their Notice of Motion application dated 29th December 2025, the applicants seek an order under Rule 5(2)(b) of the Court of Appeal Rules for stay of execution of the judgment and decree of the Environment and Land Court (ELC) (Komingoi, J.) delivered on 17th July 2025 in Kajiado ELC JR. Case No. E005 of 2023 pending the hearing and determination of their appeal. In that Judgment, the ELC quashed, by an order of Certiorari, a Certificate of Incorporation issued on 6th October 2023 under Section 7 of the repealed Land (Group Representatives) Act in respect of Mailua Group Ranch; prohibited the applicants from interfering with the operations of Mailua Group Ranch; and ordered that fresh elections in respect of Mailua Group Ranch be held within 70 days. 2.It is the applicants’ case that unless the orders sought are granted, the will of the members of Mailua Group Ranch who elected the applicants on 5th October 2023 will be subverted and the operations of Mailua Group Ranch will be crippled as it does not have elected leaders in accordance with its constitution. 3.During the hearing of the application on 25th February 2026, learned counsel Mr. Thuku Njiru appeared for the applicants; learned counsel Mr. Shadrack Wanyangu held brief for Mr. Namada for the 1st to 9th respondents; while learned counsel Mr. Kariuki appeared for the 10th to 13th respondents. We have considered the application, the supporting affidavit of Leshoko Nkoneri Siamito, the 1st applicant, the replying affidavit sworn by Daniel Koikai Kironua, and the rival written and oral submissions. 4.The legal principles applicable in applications of this nature are well established. The applicants are required to demonstrate that the intended appeal is arguable and that should the prayers in the application be refused and the appeal ultimately succeeds, it will have been success in vain. See Stanley Kangethe Kinyanjui vs. Tony Ketter and 5 Others [2013] KECA 378 (KLR). 5.On the first limb regarding whether the intended appeal is arguable, the applicants contend that their memorandum of appeal raises a number of grounds of appeal including alleged errors by the judge of finding that there was noncompliance with previous court orders. There is also the complaint that the learned Judge erred in quashing the certificate of incorporation yet the election of the applicants on 5th October 2023 accorded with the law. 6.Conscious that "an arguable appeal is not one which must necessarily succeed, but one which ought to be argued fully before the court, one which is not frivolous" (See Joseph Gitahi Gachau & Another vs. Pioneer Holdings (A) Limited & 2 Others, Civil Application No. 124 of 2008) [2009] KECA 201 (KLR), we think the intended appeal is arguable. 7.On the nugatory aspect, it is urged for the applicants that should the general meeting be held and new officials elected, the applicants will be removed from office permanently and the will of the members of Mailua Group Ranch will have been subverted and damages would not be sufficient compensation. For the respondents, on the other hand, it was urged that there is no “loss to be suffered if the Group Ranch elections are carried out in a proper manner.” We agree with the respondents. There does not appear to be any impediment to the applicants offering themselves for election. We are not persuaded that the appeal will be rendered nugatory should we decline the prayers sought. 8.Consequently, the application dated 29th December 2025 fails and is hereby dismissed with costs to the respondents. DATED AND DELIVERED AT NAIROBI THIS 3RD DAY OF JULY 2026.S. GATEMBU KAIRU, FCIArb, CArb.........................................JUDGE OF APPEALNYAMWEYA........................................JUDGE OF APPEALKATWA KIGEN........................................JUDGE OF APPEALI certify that this is a true copy of the original.SignedDEPUTY REGISTRAR.