Ajit Bhogar Singh v Kenya Power & Lighting Company [2021] KEELC 729 (KLR)
- Court
- Environment & Land Court
- Case number
- 729
- Citation
- [2021] KEELC 729 (KLR)
- Decided
- 16 November 2021
AI Summary
Beta
Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeAppealPostureAppeal from a judgment in a civil caseCoramGicheru
Holding
The court denied the application for a stay of execution and ordered the costs to be borne by the Defendant/Applicant.
Facts
The Plaintiff/Applicant filed a suit against the Defendant/Applicant for trespass and sought damages. The Defendant/Applicant filed a Notice of Appeal and an application for a stay of execution pending the appeal.
Issues
- Whether the Defendant/Applicant has fulfilled the fundamental requirements of being granted a stay of execution as set out under Order 42 rule 6 (1) & (6) of the Civil Procedure Rules?
- Who will bear the Costs of the application.
Reasoning
The court found that the Defendant/Applicant did not meet the criteria for a stay of execution as set out in the Civil Procedure Rules and the case law.
Outcome
The application for a stay of execution was denied.
Orders
- The costs of the application are to be borne by the Defendant/Applicant.
Authorities cited
Legislation (2)
- Civil Procedure Act Cap 21
- Order 42 Rule 6 of the Civil Procedure Rules 2010
Cases cited (5)
- Consolidated Marine – Versus - Namprijad & Ano. Civil Appeal No. 93 of 1989 Nairobi
- Masisi Mwita –VS_ Damaris Wanjiku Njeri [2016] eKLR
- Hassan Guyo Wakolo –VS- Straman E.A. Ltd.[2013]
- Vishram Rouji Halal –VS- Thrornton & Turpour Civil Appeal No. 15 of [1990] KLR 365
- Stephen Wanjiku –VS- Central Glass Industries Ltd. Nbi) HCC No. 6726 of 1991
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.
Loading judgment…