Wahome v Kurutu (Environment & Land Case E004 of 2022) [2022] KEELC 13420 (KLR) (6 October 2022) (Ruling)
- Court
- Environment & Land Court
- Case number
- 13420
- Citation
- [2022] KEELC 13420 (KLR)
- Decided
- 6 October 2022
AI Summary
Beta
Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeAppealPostureAppellant seeks a stay of execution of the judgment and decree of the trial court and a temporary injunction.CoramYM ANGIMA
Holding
The court grants a stay of execution of the judgment and decree of the trial court for a period of 2 years, and an order of inhibition to stop any dealings with the suit properties for a period of 2 years.
Facts
Francis Njuru Wahome was in possession of the suit properties (Nyangarua/Pesi/168 and 169) since 1995. The respondent, Joseph Muturi Kuruti, opposed the application.
Issues
- Whether the appellant has made out a case for the grant of an order of stay of execution.
- Whether the appellant has made out a case for the grant of a temporary injunction.
Reasoning
The court considers the appellant's substantial loss risk and the need to preserve the suit properties pending the appeal.
Outcome
The appeal is granted.
Orders
- Stay of execution of the judgment and decree of the trial court for a period of 2 years.
- Appellant to file and serve his record of appeal within 90 days.
- Order of inhibition to stop any dealings with the suit properties for a period of 2 years.
- Appellant to deposit Kshs 200,000/= in court as security for due performance of the decree within 21 days.
- If appellant defaults on orders (b) and (d) above, the stay granted herein shall lapse automatically.
Remedies
- Stay of execution of the judgment and decree of the trial court.
- Order of inhibition to stop any dealings with the suit properties.
Authorities cited
Legislation (3)
- Civil Procedure Act (cap.21)
- Land Registration Act, 2012
- Order 42 rule 6 of the Civil Procedure Rules
Cases cited (1)
- Butt –vs- Rent Restriction Tribunal [1979] eKLR
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…