[2020] KEELC 293 (KLR)

[2020] KEELC 293 (KLR)

The court found that the application essentially sought a stay of execution of a judgment delivered nearly twenty years ago, which had been upheld on appeal. The court noted that Order 42 Rule 6 of the Civil Procedure Rules requires security for due performance as a mandatory condition for stay, and the applicant...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2020] KEELC 293 (KLR)
Parties
Appellant: Umesh Munene; Respondent: Rose Evelyne Konje; Respondent: Commissioner of Lands; Respondent: Director of Physical Planning; Respondent: Hon. Attorney General; Respondent: Municipal Council of Meru
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Chuka
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Environment and Land Appeal 23 of 2001
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Interlocutory Application for Injunction and Stay Pending Appeal
Outcome
Application referred for interpartes hearing; no substantive orders granted at this stage.
Legal Topics
Injunctions, Stay of Execution, Appeals Process, Land Disputes
Source Language
en
Land and Property Civil Procedure Injunctions Stay of Execution Appeals Process Land Disputes

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 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Umesh Munene

Appellant

Rose Evelyne Konje

Respondent

Commissioner of Lands

Respondent

Director of Physical Planning

Respondent

Hon. Attorney General

Respondent

Municipal Council of Meru

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Interlocutory Application for Injunction and Stay Pending Appeal

  1. 1 Whether the applicant is entitled to a temporary injunction restraining the 1st respondent from interfering with the suit property pending appeal.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant has satisfied the conditions for stay of execution under Order 42 Rule 6 of the Civil Procedure Rules.
  3. 3 Whether the absence of security for due performance precludes the grant of stay of execution.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the application essentially sought a stay of execution of a judgment delivered nearly twenty years ago, which had been upheld on appeal. The court noted that Order 42 Rule 6 of the Civil Procedure Rules requires security for due performance as a mandatory condition for stay, and the applicant had not indicated provision of such security. However, the court acknowledged that security is only one of several factors to be considered in exercising discretion to grant a stay. Given the circumstances and the need for a fair hearing, the court referred the application to be heard interpartes by the Environment and Land Court Judge at Meru, directing proper service of the...

Court Disposition

Application referred for interpartes hearing; no substantive orders granted at this stage.

Orders

  • The applicant shall serve the application upon the respondents within 14 days.
  • The application will be heard interpartes by the ELC Judge at Meru on 26th January, 2021.