https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/3660
The application was duly served, remained unopposed, and was therefore merited. The court exercised its post-judgment discretion to enlarge time and authorize execution of the necessary conveyance documents to give effect to the existing judgment and decree, while declining costs.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2026] KEELC 3660 (KLR)
- Parties
- Decree Holder / Applicant: Richard Kipserem Sugut; Defendant / Respondent / Judgment Debtor: Benjamin Kipwambok Koech
- Court
- Environment and Land Court
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Environment and Land Case E013 of 2023
- Procedural Posture
- Environment and Land Case; Post Judgment Application / Ruling on Unopposed Application for Enlargement of Time and Execution of Decree
- Outcome
- Application allowed in terms of orders 2 and 3; no order as to costs.
- Judges
- ["GMA Ongondo"]
- Legal Topics
- Post Judgment Enforcement, Extension of Time, Execution of Decrees, Subdivision and Transfer of Land, Deputy Registrar Execution of Documents, 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
Richard Kipserem Sugut
Decree Holder / Applicant
Benjamin Kipwambok Koech
Defendant / Respondent / Judgment Debtor
Procedural Posture
Environment and Land Case; Post Judgment Application / Ruling on Unopposed Application for Enlargement of Time and Execution of Decree
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the court should enlarge time to implement the judgment and consequential decree
- 2 Whether the Deputy Registrar should execute conveyance documents to effect subdivision, transfer, and registration
- 3 Whether costs should be awarded
Ratio Decidendi
The application was duly served, remained unopposed, and was therefore merited. The court exercised its post-judgment discretion to enlarge time and authorize execution of the necessary conveyance documents to give effect to the existing judgment and decree, while declining costs.
Court Disposition
Application allowed in terms of orders 2 and 3; no order as to costs.
Orders
- Leave granted post judgment and timelines enlarged for implementation of the judgment dated 6 February 2025 and consequential decree regarding acquisition of title.
- Deputy Registrar authorized to execute all necessary conveyance documents to effect subdivision, transfer, and registration of the decree holder as owner of 2.08 acres out of land parcel Nandi/Chepterit/794.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
Sugut v Koech (Environment and Land Case E013 of 2023) [2026] KEELC 3660 (KLR) (11 June 2026) (Ruling) Neutral citation: [2026] KEELC 3660 (KLR) Republic of Kenya In the Environment and Land Court at Kapsabet Environment and Land Case E013 of 2023 GMA Ongondo, J June 11, 2026 Between Richard Kipserem Sugut Decree holder and Benjamin Kipwambok Koech Defendant Ruling 1.The Decree Holder/Applicant, Richard Kipserem Sugut through Cheruiyot Melly and Associates Advocates commenced an application dated 25th May 2026 against the respondent for the following orders;a.That, this honourable court be pleased to grant the applicant leave –post judgment and enlarge the timelines within which to implement the Judgment dated and delivered on 6th February 2025 together with the consequential decree thereof particularly relating to acquisition of the certificate of title by the decree holder.b.That, this honourable court be pleased to order the Deputy Registrar of this honourable court to execute all the necessary conveyance documents so as to give effect to the subdivision, transfer and the registration of the plaintiff (now decree holder) as the owner of 2.08 acres out of land parcel number Nandi/Chepterit/794 within the time so enlarged.c.That, the costs of this application be provided for. 2.The application is premised upon the applicant’s affidavit of twenty one paragraphs together with the annexed documents inclusive of copies of the judgment and decree delivered on 6th February 2025 herein and sixteen grounds, inter alia;a.That, this honourable court delivered its Judgment in this matter on 6th February 2025 in the terms shown in the Judgment annexed to the affidavit in support of the application filed herewith.b.That, this honourable court vide the judgment ordered inter alia the County Surveyor Nandi County to subdivide Nandi/Chepterit/794 (hereafter referred to as the suit property) and hive out 2.08 acres thereof in occupation by the Plaintiff (now decree holder) and upon the said subdivision the County land Registrar Nandi County to register him as the proprietor of the 2.08 acres within 90 days from the date of the judgment aforesaid.c.That, this honourable court vide the said judgment also ordered the defendant (now judgment debtor) to execute all the necessary documents so as to give effect to the subdivision and the registration of the plaintiff (now decree holder) as the owner of 2.08 acres in Nandi/Chepterit/794 within 45 days from the date of the said Judgment including surrendering of the original title for these purposes, in default, the Deputy Registrar of this court to execute the said documents within 60 days of date thereof.d.That, the decree holder/applicant has since commenced the implementation of the decree save that the same cannot be fully undertaken without the necessary approvals from the Land Control Board on an intended application for consent to transfer and the instrumentality of the transfer which have to be endorsed by the Deputy Registrar as the respondent has since defaulted in signing them and has fallen outside the timelines prescribed by the court. 3.The respondent was duly served with the application as disclosed in the affidavit of service sworn on 8th June 2026. However, he opted not to respond to it thus, there is a presumption that he was duly served as I subscribe to the decision in the case of Shadrack Arap Baiywo vs Bodi Bach (1987) eKLR. 4.Mr. Victor Kiprono learned counsel for the applicant urged the court to allow the application as the same was duly served on the respondent. 5.This court is guided by, inter alia, articles 48, 159 (2) (d) of the Constitution of Kenya 2010 and section 3 of the Environment and Land Court Act 2015 (2011) in respect of the application. 6.In the premises, I find the application unopposed, cogent and merited. 7.A fortiori, the application dated 25th May 2026 is hereby allowed in terms of orders 2 and 3 sought therein as set out at paragraph 1 (a) and (b) hereinabove with no orders as to costs being guided by the decision in the case of Rai & others vs Rai & others (2014) eKLR. 8.It is so ordered. DATED AND DELIVERED AT KAPSABET THIS 11TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026.HON. G M A ONGONDOJUDGEIn the presence of;Mr. V. Kiprono learned counsel for the Applicant/Decree Holder.Mr. Walter Kipkorir, Court Assistant.