[2013] KEHC 5749 (KLR)

[2013] KEHC 5749 (KLR)

The court found that the applicant had already been granted ample time to deposit the decretal sum and had not demonstrated sufficient cause for a further extension. The court also held that providing a log book as alternative security was not appropriate in the circumstances, given the history of the matter and the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2013] KEHC 5749 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Stephene Gitahi; Applicant: Stegi Building Construction Ltd.; Respondent: Boaz Adagala Lumwagi T/A Boada Investment
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Kakamega
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Miscellaneous Civil Application 35 of 2012
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Extension of Time and Alternative Security
Outcome
application dismissed with costs to the respondent
Legal Topics
Stay of Execution, Extension of Time, Security for Decretal Sum
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Stay of Execution Extension of Time Security for Decretal Sum

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Stephene Gitahi

Applicant

Stegi Building Construction Ltd.

Applicant

Boaz Adagala Lumwagi T/A Boada Investment

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Extension of Time and Alternative Security

  1. 1 Whether the applicant should be granted an extension of time to deposit the decretal sum.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant should be allowed to provide a log book as alternative security instead of depositing the decretal sum.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant had already been granted ample time to deposit the decretal sum and had not demonstrated sufficient cause for a further extension. The court also held that providing a log book as alternative security was not appropriate in the circumstances, given the history of the matter and the applicant's delay. The application for extension of time and for alternative security was therefore dismissed for lack of merit.

Court Disposition

application dismissed with costs to the respondent

Orders

  • The application dated 19.12.2012 is dismissed with costs to the respondent.