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

Obimbo v Ochieng (Environment and Land Appeal E037 of 2022) [2023] KEELC 731 (KLR) (14 February 2023) (Ruling)

[2023] KEELC 731 (KLR) Environment & Land Court
Read PDF
Court
Environment & Land Court
Case number
731
Citation
[2023] KEELC 731 (KLR)
Decided
14 February 2023
Beta Machine-generated summary. Automatically produced by AI from the judgment text — it may be incomplete or inaccurate. Always verify against the full judgment below. Not legal advice.

Summary at a glance

TypeLand and EnvironmentPostureAppeal from a Rent Restriction Tribunal decisionCoramSO OKONG'O
The appellant's application for a stay of the judgment and order is dismissed with costs to the respondent.

Facts

The appellant, Harrison Obimbo, was a tenant on Plot No 57, Migosi estate, Kisumu. He filed a suit against Agnette Atieno Ochieng, his landlord, seeking to restrain her from increasing rent and for the assessment of the standard rent. The respondent, Ochieng, sought access to the property for repairs. The Rent Restriction Tribunal assessed the rent at Kshs 15,000/- per month and ordered the appellant to grant access within 30 days.

Issues

  • Whether the appellant's appeal is competent against the decision of the tribunal on September 26, 2022.
  • Whether the appellant will suffer substantial loss if the stay of execution is not granted.

Reasoning

The court found that the appellant's appeal is not against the judgment and order made on September 26, 2022, and thus, the application for stay cannot be based on an appeal against a different judgment. The court also found that the appellant would not suffer substantial loss if he pays the new rent and grants access to the property.

Outcome

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The appellant's application for a stay of the judgment and order is dismissed.
  • The appellant must pay the new rent of Kshs 15,000/- per month from November 1, 2022.
  • The appellant must grant the respondent access to the suit property to carry out repairs.
⚠ This summary is experimental and generated by a language model, not a lawyer. It can contain errors, omissions, or misinterpretations and must not be relied on for legal decisions. The authoritative source is the full judgment. Please confirm every point against the original before use.
Full judgment 0.2 MB · PDF

Loading judgment…

Cite this case


        
        
      

Share this case