SheriaNet for Android — search and read Kenyan case law from your phone, offline.
Join the beta →

Madhyan v Wema Transporters Limited & 4 others (Civil Application 211 of 2021) [2021] KECA 189 (KLR) (19 November 2021) (Ruling)

[2021] KECA 189 (KLR) Court of Appeal
Read PDF
Court
Court of Appeal
Case number
189
Citation
[2021] KECA 189 (KLR)
Decided
19 November 2021
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeCivil ApplicationPostureApplication for orders of injunction, stay of proceedings and stay of executionCoramJUDGE OF APPEAL, A.K. MURGOR, JUDGE OF APPEAL, P. NYAMWEYA, JUDGE OF APPEAL, JW LESSIT
Holding

The motion is merited, and a stay of execution of the ruling of the High Court is granted on condition that the applicant files and serves the record of appeal within 45 days.

Facts

Lata Suresh Madhyan filed a suit in the High Court seeking a permanent injunction against respondents to restrain them from alienating or transferring the suit premises. The High Court granted a mandatory injunction to compel Madhyan to handover the property pending the hearing and determination of the suit. Madhyan sought orders of injunction, stay of execution and stay of proceedings against the ruling of the High Court.

Issues

  1. Whether the High Court's ruling granting the mandatory injunction was correct.
  2. Whether the intended appeal is arguable and would not be rendered nugatory if the orders were not granted.

Reasoning

The court found that the applicant's appeal is arguable due to the exercise of discretion by the trial court. The court also found that the intended appeal would not be rendered nugatory if the orders were not granted.

Outcome

The motion is granted with conditions.

Orders

  • Stay of execution of the ruling of the High Court pending the hearing and determination of the appeal.
  • The applicant must file and serve the record of appeal within 45 days.

Remedies

  • Stay of execution of the ruling of the High Court.
  • Stay of proceedings against the ruling of the High Court.
Experimental AI summary generated by a language model, not a lawyer. It may contain errors or omissions and must not be relied on for legal decisions — the full judgment below is the authoritative source.
Full judgment 0.2 MB · PDF

Loading judgment…

Cite this case


        
        
      

Share this case