The court found that the applicant had previously filed and prosecuted a similar application for stay of proceedings before the lower court, which was dismissed. The current application, being a repeat of the earlier one, was held to be barred by the doctrine of res judicata under section 7 of the Civil Procedure Act. The court emphasized that the concurrent jurisdiction to grant stay of proceedings does not permit disregard of the principles of res judicata and sub judice. The filing of a repeat application in the appellate court, after dismissal in the lower court, was deemed an abuse of court process. Consequently, the application was dismissed with costs to the respondent. However, the court directed the parties to ensure the appeal is heard and determined expeditiously to address concerns of prejudice to the applicant.